New York Politicians Falsely Attribute Blizzard to Climate Change

New England is shoveling out from under this week’s blizzard — one that was hyped as historic from New Jersey all the way up to Maine.

The storm caused New York City to shut down, with an estimated cost of $200 million of economic activity — from McDonald’s to mom and pop stores, to subway stations and town cars, all due to the expectation that the storm would put the city two feet under snow, when it only produced a mere seven inches in Central Park.

New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio and New York Governor Andrew Cuomo even went so far as to say this magnitude of storms is due to climate change — meaning the blizzards will become much more common in the future.

Indeed, climate change — formerly known as global warming — could cost us billions of dollars, but not in the form of lost productivity or retail traffic like you might be thinking. Even worse, perhaps, are the people who hype climate change and want to regulate everything to combat it, even the water under your property.

Climate Change: the New Normal?

When I saw the internal National Weather Service messages last Saturday talking about a possible “historic” snow storm Monday night, I knew the global warming folks would be swarming all over that one word. The winter has been relatively quiet, and up until this week there hasn’t been much new data to write any stories about global warming and climate change.

Then, it happened. The snow storm quickly became the poster child of climate change. Hoping to drive home the point, Governor Cuomo even linked it to Hurricane Sandy — which, funny enough, has not been scientifically linked to climate change.

So, are climate change-induced snow storms the new normal? Not really.

On the same date in 1805, two feet of snow fell on New York City. Then there was the Blizzard of 1888 that dumped two to three feet of snow on the whole Northeast, the 16-foot drifts between Philadelphia and Washington, D.C. following the 1872 blizzard, and the three feet of snow that fell on Washington D.C. in 1772.

That was well before the industrial age, and long, long before “climate change” was even invented.

So, what is all this really about?

Inconvenient Truth, or Convenient Lie?

Government environmental policy revolves around the notion that climate change causes extreme weather. Tying the two together makes it scary, and for the government, the scarier the better.

They want you to believe that government regulations of everything — from cooling stacks on power plants to the water underneath your property — will make your life and your grandchildren’s lives safer.

You see, the government needs to latch on to every extreme weather event so that the unwashed masses will readily accept that climate change needs to be dealt with. But instead of addressing the issue, all we’ll see is an increase in taxes (such as carbon taxes) in an effort to curtail corporations that are “destroying the planet,” effectively slowing economic productivity.

But a company isn’t likely to just absorb such a tax. No, it will pass the pain on to the consumer, raising the price of goods. Which you’ll be okay with, naturally, knowing your progeny will be safe in the decades to come.

Looking ahead, here are some upcoming weather events that I forecast will be attributed to climate change:

  • Two major snow storms will hit the Northeast in February, causing severe cold
  • The day or two of record breaking 80 and 90 degree temperatures coming to the Chicago area in May
  • The summer heatwave across the Southeast U.S.
  • The switch from El Niño to La Niña in 2016

These highly unpredictable events will all be falsely associated with climate change, in the hope that if you haven’t yet demanded that we control nature, you soon will. After all, climate change will cost us “billions of dollars”

Of course, the bad weather forecast and Tuesday’s shutdown splintered New York City’s daily $3.6 million gross metropolitan product. So yes, climate change costs — just not how we’re used to hearing.

And sure, this week’s snow storm did cripple parts of New England. But to be fair, eastern Massachusetts and Connecticut did get between one and three feet of snow — although those depths aren’t off-the-chart records for that region by any means.

The Global Warming Scam

There is no data that supports the notion that extreme weather events are even remotely tied to the fractional degree increase we’ve seen in global temperatures during the last 100 years. Yet, government officials, bloggers and even the mainstream media are jumping on every little weather oddity, claiming it is caused by — or at the very least enhanced by — global warming.

But without the scary storyline of climate change, there’d be no way to convert all of us ignorant folks into believers.

Be wary. Anytime the government tells you it wants to protect you and your family, it’s always got an angle — how to line its wallet, with your money.

There’s a silver lining in every cloud,
Chris Orr Sovereign Investor
Chris Orr
Certified Consulting Meteorologist

Leave a Reply