> Weather is not climate. Even when it supports climate change.

It's certainly been quite a shift to watch. 10 years ago, you'd hear "Sure is cold today, so much for global warming eh?" followed by cries that weather is not climate. Today, it seems that a hot summer day, or a cool summer day, or a warm winter day, or a particularly cold winter day, is just more proof of climate change.

I say this as someone who thinks climate change is real, by the way--but I am amused at how this all looks.

Somebody was saying last year that climate alarmists do more damage than climate deniers. I think this is true. All the prognostications sound a bit like a death cult telling us the world will end on July 15, 20xx or the Mayan calendar or the comet will signal the end and people just tune that noise out. They can smell hysteria. Part of the problem is co-opting celebrities or personalities that are louder than their understanding of the science, and make very loud and visible statements that tarnish the science and policy discussion. We'd probably all be better off if the messaging was a little more sober about what the real risk levels are and timeframes, trusting the people in time to come around. The idea of doing massive economic policy change overnight was/is a doomed proposition. It's self-defeating to try and scare people off drugs by overstating the risk, so too with scaring people into climate policy.

Agree. My argument is that you have to explain climate in ways people can understand.

I think everyone will agree tht the tree line can’t be 100m higher just because it was warm one winter. Trees take a while.

> Nobody will be convinced of anything by this sort of nonsense.

This is clearly false. Anecdotal appeals to emotion convince many people of many things, and the history of the climate change debate so far tends to suggest that appeals to emotion are much more effective than actual science.