There has been a lot of discussion about a 2002 Nature paper on Antarctic Climate Cooling on which I was lead author. Years after the fact, many continued to publicly misinterpret what our findings meant. I published an Op-ed in the NY Times in July 2006 to straighten some of the confusion out.

Here are some links to info in the NY Times Op-ed, and other stuff:
1. Amy Ridenour's piece that was published in the Providence Journal and elsewhere
2. Here is the op-ed to the Providence Journal that Ian Joughin and I wrote
3. The web column that misquotes me (I'm being generous...I don't think I've ever said anything to anyone that was even close to this).
4. Ann Coulter's original web article citing our paper and Joughins paper (read this and read #2 again). This is petty much verbatim how she uses it in her book (I've read the relevant section in the book store...my used copy I ordered from Amazon is still en route)
5. A senate policy committee document that inappropriately uses our results
6. Here's something by "envirotruth.org" which is edited by a David Ridenour (see #1). Read this and then read number 2 again
7 . Here's an excellent bit of sleuthing by a web author about the Ridenour article and if you scroll down you will see apparently Ridenour herself respond to the criticism and claim the article was written with "tongue-in-cheek".  But I've always understood tongue-in-cheek to be a form of humor...why isn't the article funny?
8. Excellent article by San Francisco Chronicle on the press' handling of the story

Examples of responsible coverage of our story
Geotimes
NY Times
(I'm still looking...)

Collection of Inappropriate Headlines:
Global Cooling in Antarctica - How is "global cooling" recorded on one continent?
Antarctica Contradicts The Global Warming Theory - in this case the headline is not just out-to-lunch, but the article is  just plain wrong on many fronts.
NSF Study Bucks Global Warming Theory - Surprisingly, I don't think this one affected my funding (note: this is a joke)

Random Thoughts:
1. It has always amazed me that skeptics of climate warming are quite ready to distrust 99% of the scientific community, but they immediately trust me only because I wrote a paper they "thought" supported their argument.
2. My favorite argument from global warming critics is "it's been warmer than this in the past" or "temperatures fluctuate all the time". But how do they know this? Because of the scientific evidence. So why do they question everything said by climate scientists concerning modern climate??
3. When did discussing the weather become political?

Miscellaneous:
1.Another article of Amy Ridenour's that is unrelated to my paper, but is so misleading it is worth posting here. Is this supposed to be tongue in cheek too? Hey, I'm no fan of AP science reporting, but when she writes "Faulty "news" stories like this one, which mislead people all over the world, do not reflect a consensus of scientists."  and then goes on to present views completely contrary to what the consensus actually is...it's great, but scary stuff. Here's an Interesting aside about Amy Ridenour.