Despite the best efforts of progressives who want to use global warming to control human consumption and the media that supports these efforts, it seems Mother Nature is not following their script.

Some examples:

I have long been a skeptic of the science behind “climate change”, and have reported on the distortions and false assumptions that form key elements of the man-made global warming assertions.

Today, I am delighted to report that even non-scientists are beginning to question the premise that humans are impacting the climate.  Holman W. Jenkins Jr. is a member of the editorial board of The Wall Street Journal and writes editorials and the weekly Business World column.  His latest Wall Street  Journal article touches upon some of the climate science data inanity:

Our ‘Hottest Year’ and Al Gore’s Epic Failure

Said the New York Times climate blog, in an assertion that was echoed throughout the media: “The temperature differences between years are usually measured in fractions of a degree, but 2012 blew away the previous record, set in 1998, by a full degree Fahrenheit.”

Really? If that were true, then hair-on-fire news should have been the fact that 2012 was 2.13 degrees hotter than 2011. That’s a far more dramatic change, and in a single year.

Nor was it mentioned that 2008, in the contiguous U.S., was two degrees cooler than 2006. Or that 2000, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2008, 2009, 2010 and 2011 were all cooler than 1998 by a larger margin than 2012 was hotter than 1998.

Are you getting the picture? None of this was mentioned because it makes a mockery of using trends in the Lower 48 as a proxy for global warming, the misguided intent that permeated media coverage of the NOAA revelation.

He makes a most fascinating comparison to gun control advocacy as well:

But climate change and gun control have one thing in common. Their advocates are more interested in asserting their moral superiority and denouncing their “enemies” than in making progress, which explains why there has been no progress.

Then, Jenkins ties it together with the “Carbon Tax” concept promoted by Al Gore to reduce carbon dioxide emissions:

Their idea, known as the “double dividend,” proposed a carbon tax to change energy-use patterns while the proceeds would be used to reduce taxes on labor and capital and encourage economic growth… Yet advocates of a carbon tax are all but invisible in the debate. Mr. Gore and his allies wore out their welcome with their exaggerations, their self-righteousness, and their perfectly foolish insistence (like the gun controllers) that a plurality of voters could be morally bullied into giving up their self-interest if chastised long and loudly enough by Mr. Gore.

As more and more people are living the weather and looking at the numbers, fewer and fewer are buying into “climate change” panic that will freeze the economic engines driving our economy, prosperity and liberties.