The puff piece on anti-wood burning disappoints me. I expect fair and nonobjective views from my news sources. The article dedicated two paragraphs for and 12 paragraphs against. Maybe I'm too sensitive in this environment where there are many mixed, political agendas with news.
Moderator's Note: The article you're referring to was a follow-up article. The original article offered an alternative viewpoint. The follow-up article you refer to gave the other viewpoint. We wanted to give both sides the opportunity to share their views. You may find the original article here: http://goo.gl/XVigbo.