December 16, 2007

Oh, the weather outside is frightful

Begin with two thick slices of homemade bread. Smear healthy layer of smooth peanut butter on one of the slices ( choosy Moms choose Jif). Thinly slice a Granny Smith apple and layer over the peanut butter. Now add a heaping pile of roasted, shredded crow. Top with the other slice of bread. Now eat that weatherman.

Our estimated 12-17 inches of snow layered with ice and freezing rain turned into a tawdry few inches instead. It is blowing. Given the flatness of the terrain, drifting snow will render east/west roads impassable. The point is, your estimates were wrong by a factor of several hundred percent Weatherman. Your track record is miserable. Why not just say it looks like we will get snow and leave the rest to chance. How about a freakin' apology for the scare tactics you employ to get us to keep your station tuned in for weather updates instead of reading blogs and watching porn?

Look, I get it. The weatherman's prognostications are based on computer models. The capricious winds blow where they want, not as a computer programs. The movement of a front or low pressure cell by a dozen miles can change the local weather enormously. The weather quack errors on the side of caution. Hurricanes Katrina and Andrew and thousands of tornadoes have proven it is better to warn people of the worst, to protect us from our own ignorance and stupidity. I think we can all agree forecasting the weather is a guess and in no way an exact science.

Given that understanding, how in the world can anyone accept the forecast and computer estimates of our weather two, ten and even fifty years from now? Is the weather from last December 17 an indication of what will happen tomorrow? Can we say with scientific certainty that just because it often rains on my wife's birthday it will rain on June 8, 2013? Do any of these theories sound remotely scientific or even plausible? Then why are you buying the global warming crap? Maybe it is getting warmer, maybe not. Perhaps weather patterns have changed. Is this a harbinger of global catastrophe? Will the polar bears drown? Will the Mexicans be moving to Greenland to pick tomatoes? Only time will tell. I do know it is economic suicide to bet our economy and way of life on computer models that cannot predict the weather 12 hours in advance.

Oh, Hoosierboy, a consensus of scientist agree we are facing apocalyptic climate change that will destroy our planet. Well a consensus of weather experts also said I would be looking at a foot of blowing drifting frozen and crystalized water clogging my driveway this morning. A consensus of scientists believed our planet was flat at one time. A consensus of scientists believed the Sun revolved around the Earth. Heck, a consensus of some of the greatest thinkers in history believed the sun was pulled through the sky by Apollo in his golden chariot. The same scientists who are now ringing the alarm bells of global warming were in agreement a few decades ago we were faced with a coming ice age that would doom our planet, our civilization, our way of life. The computer models said so.

Take your global warming hysteria and shove it straight up your greasy hemorrhoidal asshole, Al Gore. If my local weather expert cannot predict the climate tomorrow, why would I listen to a politician that has never worked a real job?

No comments:

Consider everything here that is of original content copyrighted as of March 2005