Saying Cold Weather Is A Result Of Climate Change Is A Ridiculous Copout

For many people in the United States, it is hard to ignore the polar vortex that struck the U.S. this past week. Many in the northern and mid-western states are facing record-lows in temperature.
 
And just as quickly as the polar vortex hit, climate “experts” and believers chocked it all up to man-made climate change.
 
However, this is one massive and ridiculous copout and I will explain momentarily.
 
First, let me tell you that the reason for me writing this is the fact that I was looking through articles to give me some inspiration to write and came across one that contains an excerpt from the book “The Politically Incorrect Guide to Climate Change.”
 
I was originally going to write about this topic yesterday, but the whole issue of debating whether or not a baby is a baby and should be allowed to live OUTSIDE the womb came up and I really needed to address that.
 
However, now we shall discuss this climate topic because it’s still relevant.
 
This is the excerpt of the book around which I am basing this article:
 
“Predictions of less snow were ubiquitous by global warming scientists. But once that prediction failed to come true, the opposite of what they predicted instead became – what they expected. How did global warming scientists explain record snow after predicting less snow? Easy. More snow is now caused by global warming. ‘Snow is consistent with global warming, say scientists’ blared a UK Telegraph headline in 2009. The Financial Times tried to explain ‘Why global warming means… more snow’ in 2012… So no matter what happens, the activists can claim with confidence the event was a predicted consequence of global warming. There is now no way to ever falsify global warming claims.”
 
A very interesting excerpt from that book. However, I would like to disagree with the final argument that there is no way to falsify global warming claims now. There is.
 
This is precisely the reason I call this sort of thing a copout. Scientists and “experts” were predicting less snow. When that prediction turned out to be false, and the opposite happened – more snow – they said that that was also global warming.
 
Even though it literally makes no sense to chock up snow and cold temperatures to global WARMING (and even that Financial Times headline alludes to this ridiculous notion) that’s what they were saying. And that’s why they switched from “global warming” to “climate change”, so they would never be wrong about predictions (except, of course, they still are).
 
But it’s a complete and total copout. Every time they use “climate change” instead of “global warming” that’s a copout.
 
At least global warming was trying to predict something specific. But using “climate change” just so they can be right about the climate getting warmer or colder is basically the same as saying: “I predict the stock market will end higher by the end of the year… or lower… or about the same. I’m an financial genius!”
 
As it turns out, the climate will either get colder after a certain amount of time, get hotter, or stay about the same with next to no change.
 
THOSE ARE THE ONLY OPTIONS! So of course they are never wrong in their predictions. They don’t have to be specific about this sort of thing anymore.
 
Notice how the whole argument of “our kids will not get to experience snow unless they see it in movies or the internet” is no longer used? That’s because they have no actual way of telling whether or not that will actually be the case, so their predictions get broader and vaguer, or they are predictions about things that won’t happen for a very long time when no one will remember such predictions.
 
Of course, people like AOC still make short-term predictions just because, but it really doesn’t matter. No one’s going to hold her accountable for it, even when she turns out to be wrong in 12 years.
 
I’ve often said that the point of climate change is not so the Left would be right about anything. They don’t care about being right. They only care about making people be afraid of this climate change and make people think only Democrats can ever come up with “solutions” to this “problem”.
 
It’s almost like the mafia demanding “protection” money. The Democrats are the ones that make people be afraid and thus, they make people “pay” them by electing them into power.
 
But at the same time, the Democrats need to be able to seem somewhat reasonable as far as climate change goes. What I mean by that is that they can’t keep making predictions of less snow when there’s more snow, can’t make predictions about an impending apocalypse set to occur in a decade or so, and can’t keep suggesting the climate is only getting warmer, when it could also get colder.
 
Their credibility would take some serious hits if they are constantly wrong about every single thing.
 
Granted, they have no credibility with conservatives, but I’m also talking about credibility with just about anyone.
 
Are people more likely to believe someone who is constantly wrong about something or someone who cops out and makes general and broad predictions that will turn out to be true only because they cover the only possible options?
 
It’s because of this that they switched to “climate change”. They saw they were dead wrong about pretty much everything they were selling to people, so they started to say that cold weather is also because of global warming. Only that makes zero sense to anyone with half a brain, so they decided to start calling it climate change. The focus was that the climate was still getting warmer but they leave themselves the room to claim that the climate can also get colder.
 
It’s a massive copout, but it’s necessary to retain their credibility (however little they may have) and to retain the narrative’s usefulness to elect Democrats.
 
These people are completely shameless in their pursuit of power, opting to constantly lie and deceive people to attain it. Workers of deceit is what they are.
 
Proverbs 29:2
“When the righteous increase, the people rejoice, but when the wicked rule, the people groan.”
 
And please make sure to check out our free weekly newsletter. As the name suggests, it is a newsletter that comes completely free of charge. What you get is a compilation of the week’s articles sent right into your inbox. So make sure to check it out today!
 
Author: Freddie Marinelli.