And let’s ignore this too “…the scandal which has forced the IPCC’s top officials, led by Dr Pachauri, to disown a claim originating from an Indian glaciologist, Dr Syed Husnain, that the Himalayan glaciers could vanish by 2035. What has made this reckless claim in the IPCC’s 2007 report even more embarrassing was the fact that Dr Husnain, as we revealed, was then employed by Dr Pachauri’s own Delhi-based Energy and Resources Institute (Teri). His baseless scaremongering about the Himalayas helped to win Teri a share in two lucrative research contracts, one funded by the EU.”

Since you can’t contradict it, Dan, best to ignore it.

The other claim is fascinating. “The scientific treatise summarizing the whole premise is based is proven to be wildly faulty (to put it mildly) but I have some pictures anyway.”

And an isolated temperature reading. Which is beautiful in and of itself since it’s been shown that a large number of temperature reporting stations have been systematically dropped over the years from these studies, rendering comparison between earlier sets of data and current sets menaingless.

Dan, doesn’t take too much work to look this up re: the Amazon either. But I’ll do it for you, since you don’t appear inclined. “…The IPCC made a prominent claim in its 2007 report, again citing the WWF as its authority, that climate change could endanger “up to 40 per cent” of the Amazon rainforest – as iconic to warmists as those Himalayan glaciers and polar bears. This WWF report, it turned out, was co-authored by Andy Rowell, an anti-smoking and food safety campaigner who has worked for WWF and Greenpeace, and contributed pieces to Britain’s two most committed environmentalist newspapers. Rowell and his co-author claimed their findings were based on an article in Nature. But the focus of that piece, it emerges, was not global warming at all but the effects of logging.”

At a certain point you cross the line from condescension into obtuseness. You’re ignoring evidence like you are trying out for the LAPD.

As for the rainforests, I’ve seen predictions that global warming will help or harm them — irrelevant to the question of whether climate change is real.

But … but … it’s snowing in Washington!

Does pointing that out help?

Or how about the fact that record numbers of manatees died in Florida this year from…the cold?

Condescend away!

But we digress, how did the social media “unconference” go?

Jeff jacoby is very excited about this Washington Post piece that examines why liberals are so condescending.

One possible explanation might be that it’s damn hard not to be when right-wingers point to a snowstorm as evidence that global warming isn’t real.