From FT Q&A page:

Mr Klaus writes that "global warming hysteria has become a prime example of the truth versus propaganda problem" and the issue "is more about social than natural sciences and more about man and his freedom than about tenths of a degree Celsius changes in average global temperature."

Do you agree? Or do small climate changes demand far-reaching restrictive measures? Mr Klaus will answer your questions in an online Q&A. Post a question now to ask@ft.com or use the online submissions form below - his answers will appear on Thursday June 21 from 1pm BST.

Emphasis mine, to stress how the subject gets neatly framed, the Bush way. You either agree with Klaus, or you belong to the group that thinks that "far-reaching restrictive measures" are needed for "small climate changes". Never mind what one should expect for -large- climate changes.

Or this is just a clever trick of the editor to get frothing responses - which Klaus & co then can mock as a rabid collection of environmental fundamentalists.