Do the hoaxsters pushing the anthropogenic global warming protest too much? Scientific arguments can be refuted by evidence and not complaints about semantics. President Donald Trump tweets [1] about the weather,
In the East, it could be the COLDEST New Year’s Eve on record. Perhaps we could use a little bit of that good old Global Warming that our Country, but not other countries, was going to pay TRILLIONS OF DOLLARS to protect against. Bundle up!
Note that the President used the word perhaps. The tweet was presented as a suggestion or question, and not as an assertion. Yet at least one partisan of the anthropogenic global warming hoax felt motivated into rebutting a quip, from Axios [2]:
The semantics around climate change, or global warming, are almost as divisive as the science itself. Global warming was the default term up until the last decade or so, when climate change became more popular among those urging action to cut greenhouse gas emissions. That shift was partly to respond to comments like Trump made Thursday by clarifying that a higher global aggregate temperature does not mean the entire planet would be getting universally warmer.
Whoa, it does seem that climate change hoaxsters are willing to blame every bad weather event on anthropogenic global warming, from NRDC [3]:
Higher temperatures are worsening many types of disasters, including storms, heat waves, floods, and droughts. A warmer climate creates an atmosphere that can collect, retain, and drop more water, changing weather patterns in such a way that wet areas become wetter and dry areas drier. “Extreme weather events are costing more and more,” says Aliya Haq, deputy director of NRDC’s Clean Power Plan initiative. “The number of billion-dollar weather disasters is expected to rise.”
It the hoaxsters behind the anthropogenic global warming scare want to convince skeptics of their case, they will need more than opinion surveys and word diarrhea.