Response to changes in rainfall commentary
The National Weather Service had to apologize recently when its computer modeling program, the one it uses to fraudulently “prove” man-caused climate change, incorrectly predicted a massive snow storm that petered out, unnecessarily shutting down New York at a cost of $200 million in lost business.
Like a con artist staying one step ahead of the law, the man-caused global cooling movement became global warming when temperatures rose instead of falling, switching to climate change when temps leveled off.
In Nov., 2009, thousands of leaked emails from the Climatic Research Unit at the University of East Anglia in Great Britain revealed climatologists conspiring among themselves to manipulate climate “science” so that their grant money would keep flowing.
Any good cop will tell you that when the suspect changes his story he’s guilty, but there’s nothing like a confession to close the case.
In the face of 40 years of climate change false prophesies, Ursula Carlson’s column (“Looking at the adverse changes in rainfall” in the Jan. 28 Appeal) that global rainfall anomalies are being caused by climate change is ignorance on stilts.