http://www.telegraph.co.uk/topics/weather/9950516/Worst-Marc...
Let's review. First article states, perhaps poorly, that snow will become less frequent and more extreme. Pretty much in line with all predictions.
Second, I learned that it can snow in the UK. Terrific.
Third, it actually snowed in the UK. A lot. Everyone's shocked. You cite this as bad PR or bad predictions or something.
I'm going to call this one a push. I'll now give you the benefit of the doubt. You blame the scientists for irresponsible reporting done by the corporate entertainment industry. I think that's unfair. But you probably haven't ever tried to get "the media" to cover an important story, correctly, much less at all.
Snow becomes less frequent and more extreme as compared to what? On a big enough timeline you could probably show a series of different outcomes relating to climate that will say whatever you want it to say. Who's to say that less frequent but more extreme snow is a bad thing? Maybe it used to be normal, become less common, and now we're returned to what used to be normal.
I admit though that I've never been to the UK nor was I around for the last major ice age so I don't know about snowfall in the UK over the years.
Really?
You link to an article specifically about snowfall in Britain and then dismiss it with the counter evidence of record snowfall else where.
You need to try harder.
...losing the war of public opinion.
FUD. Good job. Please. Continue.