In the article we are talking about, Robert Varghese contributed this comment:

Most of the glibertarians, cultural conservatives, and gadget-heads who constitute the useful idiots around the core oil-and-coal-company global-warming denialist constituency would be horrified to imagine themselves playing the role of 9/11 Truthers, or RFK Jr. pumping the thimerosal/autism link, or Thabo Mbeki claiming that AIDS isn’t caused by HIV. But all four “movements” are alike in depending on compete mistrust of actual scientific experts.

While there are liars and frauds pushing global warming, that of itself doesn’t make global warming false. Liars can mix true statements in with the false.

Shame on George Will for quote mining and selective interpretation of the evidence. An honest account of what the University of Illinois Arctic Climate Research Center’s data had to say about 1979 would have indicated that, comparing apples to apples by selecting the exact same date from both years, sea ice had significantly declined. A scientifically honest account would have made the point that according to scientists who model climate, one would expect arctic sea ice to decline during global warming, but that antarctic sea ice was harder to predict and that it might well increase. The best case Will’s defenders can make is that at some point during 1979, sea ice levels overall were roughly equal to Will’s comparison data, as a result of increased antarctic ice offsetting losses to arctic ice.

Will’s overall point was that evidence from UIACRC studies tended to disconfirm the AGW hypothesis. But the very sea ice evidence he’s citing fits in nicely with the predictions of climate modelers, and only selective quotation and misquotation and word-fudging allow Will to argue that it points the other way.