One of the weirdest parts of the @NYTimes’ smear job on me was reporter @ReidEpstein claiming I “offered a false history of Greenland,” then quibbling about the origin of a name. 1/9https://t.co/cFKWfxa50l

— Senator Ron Johnson (@SenRonJohnson) March 22, 2021

Full Thread by Señor RonAnon: “In the interview, it was clear Reid Epstein was building a narrative about ‘disinformation.’ I called him on it, demanding he cite any. He backpedaled, saying I mentioned in 2010 how Greenland used to be green. That is, I said Greenland once had a more temperate climate, so the Norse settled there for a while. Which happens to be true. Epstein should try reading up: Solving the ‘climate mystery’ of the Vikings. Notice, I wasn’t saying Greenland had no ice, only that people once found it more hospitable for settlement.”

“Which, again, is true: Study shows that Vikings enjoyed a warmer Greenland. What the New York Times and Reid Epstein seized on, of course, was the bit that I said was mere supposition on my part, the bit about Greenland’s name. The trivia. The part that wasn’t the point. As for the supposed ‘false history’ that Epstein cites, the part where he’s either ignorant of or lying about what anyone can easily read: Why Did Greenland’s Vikings Vanish? Newly discovered evidence is upending our understanding of how early settlers made a life on the island – and why they suddenly disappeared… It raises a bigger question: If The New York Times and Reid Epstein either can’t understand what a conservative says or resort to intentionally mischaracterizing it on a small matter like this, how can anyone trust them on larger matters? It isn’t just Greenland. The New York Times and Reid Epstein add, as proof of ‘disinformation,’ that I ‘said excess carbon dioxide in the atmosphere ‘helps the trees grow.’’ Which it does, say scientists: Study Finds Trees Growing Taller Due to Climate Change. New research out of West Virginia University says trees are now taking up more Carbon Dioxide than ever recorded. And because forests are the planet’s. The New York Times expects readers will be ignorant of news that contradicts the approved narrative and reassures them that conservatives asking inconvenient questions can be ignored. It’s deception, not journalism. The New York Times should be ashamed of squandering any credibility it still has.”