You must have been listening to a different show.
He had an expert on today who AGREED with him on his take on the fakery of global warming.
That would be an expert from NASA, calling in from Huntsville, AL. The most salient point the expert made was the lack of input to the warming/cooling debate on the precipitation cycles of the planet ... has anyone ever inputted the amount of cooling or carbon sequestering resulting from x number of feet of snow or y inches of rain? No, so the entire data mass is totally inadequate for the conclusions dolts like the weather channel face made recently.
Rush and the expert agreed that global warming hasn't been proven.
The expert stated that weather is an initial value problem - you look at the current variables and extrapolate out from there. The expert stated that climate is a different kind of problem. I think it was him that said that chip makers can't even predict things in their highly controlled environment.
Comparing the weather and the climate is like predicting the outcome of throwing a die. We don't know what the next throw will be, but we expect each side to come up 1/6 of the time for a fair die. If we make one side heavier, we still don't know the next throw, but we can still predict the proportion, particularly if we throw it enough times.