Note that it is widely said that the WSJ does good news, but that its editorial section is considered by many to be biased. To quote Wikipedia's summary of that view, "The Journal editorial board has promoted pseudoscientific views on the science of climate change, acid rain, and ozone depletion, as well as on the health harms of second-hand smoke, pesticides and asbestos." They go into more detail at [1].

That's not a statement one way or the other about this particular editorial, but the WSJ editorial page does have a history of climate denial and I'd take their views on this trial with a grain of salt.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Wall_Street_Journal#Editor...