Oh really. Do explain.
Oh really. Do explain.
My depiction of the alarmists' views would be: no matter what happens it's either global warming or a negligible hiccup in the global warming trend. In many cases the GW theory adapts to the observations so that the new theory matches. In the latest case as you know from realclimate.org, less snow in Antarctica means that some temporary phenomenon decreased the snow. Less snow there than predicted means sea levels rise more than predicted which equals scary global warming pulp for the masses via the media, so either way it helps the cause.
If it resumes snowing there or new measurements show that is has snowed more there, then that will be a confirmation of global warming. The fact that they can't model the weather properly (way too shallow on persistent trough) doesn't seem to matter. The physicists who run that site and dominate most of the AGW debate don't really care about weather even though weather is climate.