As of this writing, a blizzard is pummeling the Northeastern United States. Not surprisingly, today the New York Times published an opinion piece, entitled “Bundle Up, It’s Global Warming.” Its author tries to explain how it is that “the overall warming of the atmosphere is actually creating cold-weather extremes.” I’ll let you decide whether that attempt to explain our cold winter weather is successful, or if it is instead an example of petitio principii (the fallacy of begging the question) by arbitrary redefinition of some kind.
Really, it doesn’t matter one way or the other. Unless we have reached a state of widespread natural disaster, such that the peaceful coexistence of human beings on earth is impossible, the only proper way to deal with “global warming,” “climate change,” or whatever the power-grabbing bureaucrats choose to call it this week, is via the free market. Only the free market, i.e., pure laissez-faire capitalism, embodies the proper principles of peaceful, voluntary coexistence among human beings. Upholding such principles will allow human beings to produce the technology necessary to thrive in whatever climate we have in store for us. Abandoning them, by e.g., taxing citizens to fund measures designed to “reduce greenhouse gases”, is not only ineffective in terms of addressing the supposed problem, but also further destroys our economy and makes us less able to produce the values (insulated structures and motor vehicles, heat, air conditioning, etc.) necessary for us to endure periods of extreme weather.
Don't Let It Go 
Of course, one snowy day neither proves nor disproves a climate theory. It’s just that global-warming-anti-industrial-environmentalist-America-hating-dictator-loving-socialist-Leftist-nihilist true believers have a short circuit in their brain. In other words: They’re F*****G nut-jobs!
Or, they’ve so deeply internalized the idea that sacrifice is a moral virtue never to be questioned that all they ever see is polarized through it’s lens.
It is even crazier that many environmentalists think that third-world countries should “stay poor” so that they don’t emit any greenhouse gases. As if kids in the Congo should not have cheap energy and economic opportunity.
…or air conditioning!
One doesn’t need to live in the Midwest for long to realize that it snows when it’s warmer, not colder. The environmentalists’ argument is that warming causes more evaporation, which puts more water vapor in the air, which causes more snow. This doesn’t involve any arbitrary redefinition of “warming.” It’s a pretty ordinary, well-established idea that increased temperatures cause increased evaporation. I’m not saying that the theory is right. The attempt to show how winter climate anomalies are consistent with the global warming theory does smell like the arbitrary (insofar as it looks like the attempt to insulate the theory from evidence). But it’s not begging the question through arbitrary redefinition.
I’m a native Californian, but I’ve heard of the phenomenon you describe: that sometimes it’s actually too cold for it to snow. The theory presented in the article I cited is supposed to explain not just an increase in snow, but also extremely cold temperatures in America and Europe over the last couple of winters. Yes, it does attempt to explain these phenomena via the issue of increased snow cover in a certain region of the world. But increased snow cover could also be due to the snow not melting off, i.e., it being colder there, right? That’s why I say the whole thing is so convoluted that the important thing is not to take our eye off the ball: the advocacy of laissez-faire capitalism as (1) the only moral system, the one that protects voluntary, peaceful coexistence among human beings and (2) the only system that has been consistently shown, throughout history, to encourage wealth creation and innovation. The more wealth and better technology we have, the better equipped we will be to deal with messy weather of whatever type, whatever the cause.