The foolishness of citing a local cold spell as evidence against a global average warming trend is just the most obvious of many misunderstandings (or deliberate obfuscations?) in the above answer.
Another is the following:
“CO2 is indeed a ‘greenhouse’ gas, and so is H2O. Care to guess which has a higher effect on the earth’s temperature? (Hint, it’s not CO2)”
H2O is indeed the biggest contributor to the overall global greenhouse effect, but since there is masses of exposed water surface in contact with the atmosphere the amount of H2O in the atmosphere depends on the temperature, and once equilibrium is reached it is not a source of further changes. What it does do though at least to first order is amplify the effect of any other source of temperature change, so the net effect of increased CO2 is actually much greater than that due directly to the IR absorption by just the CO2 itself.
The question of whether higher order effects (such as changes in albedo due to changes in cloud cover) act to damp or to amplify the simple first order effects is much more complex. So we don’t yet know for sure how bad it might get. But until we have a better understanding of that it is foolish to keep our foot on the accelerator in the hope that the brakes might just come on automatically to save us before we crash.