Without my consent and against my wishes, I might add.
That’s not “Eddie’s position.” His position is that scientific debate ought to be about data and the interpretation of data, about hypotheses and means of confirming or disconfirming them, and that political partisanship (which quite obviously motivates, e.g., Michael Mann, as his private emails prove), arguments from authority, ad hominem arguments, etc. should have no place, either in science itself, or in public policy debates that concern scientific matters.
As for “tone”, tone is a concern insofar as tone is routinely used by some scientists, and by many of their groupies, to convey disrespect toward trained scientists with whom they disagree, and the emanation of disrespect colors scientific discussion with an emotional and often political overlay which gets in the way of detached, dispassionate consideration of hypotheses and data. My submission of what I honestly thought was a calm and intelligent discussion about global warming has been met here with plain indications of disrespect, both toward me and toward the gentlemanly scientist who is heard in the video; it was this habitual expression of disrespect (scientific, academic, intellectual, professional, and personal) that produced my recent long absence from this site, and it is this that will produce the next one, starting sometime around now.