Hey News Media, If ‘Climate Change’ is Causing Droughts, Why Do They Keep Ending?
For the past several days, I have spent much of my time here in Southern California doing two things: Trying to keep from banging my head against a wall in response to Sean Spicer and Kellyanne Conway creating President Trump’s “post-Truth” world, and attempting to keep my house from being flooded by record rainfall. There will be all-too-much time to discuss that first issue, so I want comment on the second one right now.
Thanks to the news media having no incentive to tell you this, you may not have noticed but the California drought, which eighteen months ago was “historic” and “catastrophic,” has suddenly effectively ended. The key mountain range where in 2015 Governor Jerry Brown famously revealed the snowpack to be virtually nonexistent is now at 180% of normal for this time of year, while state-wide “snow water” is 193%.
Yes, I know, technically there are parts of the now water-logged state which are still designated as in some level of “drought,” but that percentage has recently shrunk more quickly than even the chances of Trump ever sending out that mass deportation force he once promised to capture illegal immigrants. It should also be pointed out that, thanks to over population and an extremely inefficient distribution system, California, much of which is essentially a desert, will still likely be in a long-term water “shortage,” regardless of what happens with the weather.
With that all said, what bothers me greatly about the news media basically saying “never mind” to the California drought story is that they have constantly used it over the last few years as a political prop in order to promote their religion of “Global Warming, wait, no, that’s too specific, Climate Change.” The mainstream media and their friends in academia constantly claimed that the California drought was both caused and exacerbated by a man-made change in our weather patterns.
But wait a minute. If something is supposedly the cause of a weather phenomenon and that phenomenon suddenly no longer exists, shouldn’t logic dictate that we at least ask whether that might mean that the “something” either doesn’t really exist, or at least wasn’t the cause of the original abnormality? If someone went on a dating drought convinced it was caused by their weight and then got on an extended hot streak without that attribute changing, would they not reconsider their original analysis of the problem?
To be clear, I’m not saying that the “end” of the California drought proves for sure that man-made “Global Warming/Climate Change” doesn’t exist. What I am saying is that we should at least be asking that question, especially since this is not the first time in recent history where we have seen this exact pattern.
Within the last decade, both Texas and Florida have endured deep droughts which the news media was all-to-eager to blame on “Global Warming.” Both of those droughts ended in much the same way as the California version, and yet there was never any questioning of the potentially faulty premises (ironically/tellingly, both states went through droughts partly because hurricane activity, which was supposed to increase with “Global Warming” has instead been rather quiet).
For the record, the current lack of drought in this country isn’t just limited to those prominent states. According to the latest official tracking update (which, significantly, is several days old and doesn’t include the recent deluge to hit California), we are in in fantastic shape across the nation. In fact, less than 7% of our land mass is now considered to be even marginally in a significant drought, which is historically extremely low.
I realize that this is far too “simple” a way to look at this for the metrological elitists who think they know better than everyone else (despite the fact that they are wrong far more than just about anyone else in public life). However, if in three major states in the last few years “Global Warming/Climate Change” is said to have caused a drought (which has been a natural cyclical occurrence since well before man ever existed) and that drought no longer exists, it is more than logical to question whether the original premise is very wrong.
Further enhancing my skepticism towards those telling us that all negative weather events (wait, I’m sorry, episodes which don’t fit their theory are considered “weather,” but otherwise this is a “climate” issue) are at least partially man-made, even more than their financial/career self-interests, is that these same people were dead wrong about how the California drought would end.
Prior to and during last winter, there were a batch of stories predicting that “El Nino” would at least partially save California from its horrendous drought. However, that turned out to be flat wrong.
This year we were told that the drought would likely get even worse because the “La Nina” weather pattern taking over would provide the state with even less rain and snow than normal. Instead, this winter is on pace to produce more precipitation to most of the state than any other in recent history (and, by the way, it has also been clearly the coldest in my thirteen years of living here).
I’m sorry, but when the very same people who are telling me that we are all going to die many decades from now because of “climate change” (unless of course we immediately destroy what is left of our economy) are constantly calamitously wrong about what is going to happen in the very near future, they lose all credibility. This is especially true when these same people also have a massive self-interest to promote, or at least go along with, the “group think” of their industry which dictates that, if you disagree with the “conventional wisdom,” then you are some sort of “nut-job.”
As someone who has already been called every name in the book for taking positions based on facts and logic rather than a fear of being seen as outside the safety of the popular herd, this threat has no influence on me. All I ask is that we look at this issue with open eyes and not through the prism of self-fulfilling presumptions.
Now, please excuse me as I continue to work on my ark.
This is an opinion piece. The views expressed in this article are those of just the author.