More of that damned global warming…

Snow.

And more snow.

It’s “global warming” dontcha know.

Now, before climate alarmists start whining that it’s not fair to cite local conditions to support an argument against global warming, let me remind any who might erroneously wander by twc thinking a reference to global warming will earn them a warm reception, global warmists, climate alarmists are steeped in the “special cases” argument, whereby they make errors of composition.

“The antarctic ice cap is melting!” Yeh, and the sky is falling, too. So? Global warmists have made much of the fact that ONE portion of the Antarctic ice cap is melting… while ignoring the fact that the large majority of the Antarctic ice fields are growing, and at a greater rate than ice is being lost elsewhere.

On balance, the Antarctic ice fields are greater than five or ten years ago, but that doesn’t stop global warmists from screaming, “The ice is melting! The ice is melting!”

Local conditions.

Now, should I cite the studies I read that demonstrate that the global warming alarmists are liars? Nah. Useless. Senator James Imhoffe tried that in his speeches from the Senate floor (the texts, available here, are replete with credible citations). What did that net Imhoffe? About the same that it nets any scientist—anyone, no really, anyone—who dares to flaunt the global climate alarmist party line. As you’ll read in the linked articles, some global warmists are calling for “Nuremburg trials” for “global warming deniers” and equating them with Holocaust deniers.

Scum. That’s what anyone who believes there ought to be open, rational examination of the facts is: scum. Anathema. Evil.

So, let’s just not go there. Why, without any thought whatsoever (or, actually, via lobotomizing ourselves and eliminating rational thought) we can beat the global warmists at their own game by irrationally arguing every little cold wave is proof positive that they are wrong.

Makes as much sense as global warmists’ lies.

Dumbasses.