Arguing science with people who don't understand that global warming results in changes in both warming and cooling (e.g., changes in the jet stream) is not a productive use of time.
And I don't see that the state of the climate has gotten better since the article was written.
Arguing anything with people that don't admit to facts (as in 10 years that have already passed in a 20 year timeline of predictions) isn't very productive as well.
I'm not debating climate change, as I've said many times I don't have a position on it because I simply don't know enough about it (something I will freely admit, unlike others who pretend to be experts on every subject under the sun merely because they consider themselves "well read"). But what I do know is that 10 years ago the Pentagon made a prediction to GWB and it was quite absurd, and they're doing it again. That says all I need it to say.