It took me a while but I finally figured out what the Global Warming argument reminded me of. Back in 1995 we had the OJ Simpson trial on TV. OJ's 1st reaction was to run in the infamous low speed white Bronco chase and his alibi for the time of the murders was flimsy at best. The prosecution had a mountain of DNA evidence and they carefully lined up expert witness after expert witness. Then, Mark Fuhrman took the stand. One cop with a questionable past plus asking OJ to put the glove on was enough to place doubt in the jury's mind. Anyone remember "If it doesn't fit - you must acquit"?
And here we are years later. The enviros sit on one side of the court room with what they think is rock solid proof. Charts, graphs and the backing of an ex-vice president. The other side is searching for any cracks in the argument. The enviros keep pointing to the charts and graphs thinking 'I'm sure they will see it eventually and come to their senses'. That is where they are dead wrong. The other side has seen the evidence and it doesn't mean shit to them. Recently, the e-mail leaks made headlines so here is a new one..."if enviros alter data - the rest doesn't matta".