Balancing Act take two

Today's paper - print and online - have a little example of real "balance".

Q: If global warming is real, why is it so cold?

Two answers, one explaining the difference between weather and climate and detailing the cause of the current cold weather (The cold winter thus far in many parts of the United States and northern Europe has been caused by another oscillation, the Arctic oscillation. A strong high pressure over Greenland deflects cold air of the jet stream farther to the south than usual. But Arctic temperatures have been quite a bit warmer than usual, as are temperatures around the Mediterranean, most of Africa, South America and south Asia.) and the other starting with a nice but irrelevant tu quoque and then falling back on saying "no proof!" (Some activists are now claiming that the cold snap is evidence that global warming increases extreme whether events, be it unusual cold or heat. In truth, the evidence of an uptick in extreme weather is thin.)

The real kicker is that response one is from Donald F. Boesch, president, University of Maryland Center for Environmental Science, but response two is from Ben Lieberman, senior policy analyst at the Heritage Foundation's Roe Institute for Economic Policy.

Yeah. An economist. Or, rather, an economics policy analyst. He's qualified to talk about climate change why, exactly?