From CFACT

By Joe Bastardi

One day, and I hope it’s in the not-too-distant future, when we can finally rid ourselves of climate hysteria, historians will begin to grapple with the staggering cost this has inflicted on humanity. The sheer amount of time and money squandered on something we should simply adapt to—it’s likely astronomical. Not only that, but it has stymied true advancement by diverting funds away from far more worthy pursuits, creating an incalculable loss. The pain and aggravation it has caused, the needless loss of human life it has triggered—after all, if Russia lacked the money to wage war, they wouldn’t start one, nor would Iran. Were it not for the attempted overthrow of our way of life over the last four years, the momentum set in the previous four would have yielded massive dividends, instead of plunging us into a hole so deep that, no matter what President Trump does, it will take divine intervention to climb out.

But that’s not really the subject here. What the subject truly is, is how NOAA’s relentless emphasis on climate change has obscured the public’s awareness of just how exceptional the National Weather Service has become.

As the longest-running global forecaster in the private sector, I’ve always viewed the National Weather Service as a competitor. But my attitude has evolved into one of profound respect, admiration, and gratitude. Because I know I must add real value to my forecasts—they produce darn good ones that push me to elevate my own game. In the last decade, I’ve also sought involvement in public-private partnerships with the National Weather Service to exchange ideas. Though, because I speak my mind on certain issues, that’s probably not going to happen. However, I want readers of CFACT to understand that the weather and climate divisions of NOAA are two entirely distinct entities. NOAA’s constant push on climate change issues has robbed the National Weather Service of its due. Not only has it siphoned actual money that could have bolstered the Weather Service, but it has also prevented the general public from grasping how darn good they truly are. Now, I don’t think some of their models match the European model, for instance, but I could list endless tools I draw from NOAA’s weather branch—not copying forecasts, but leveraging their research, available maps, past weather reconstructions, and more. The list is endless. And yet, nobody in the general public knows about it.

Now, what I’m about to say won’t make me popular with those eager to slash government spending—and I haven’t scrutinized the recent cuts to the National Weather Service directly. But I want you to understand something: Why would I, as a competitor, want the National Weather Service to improve? Simple—for one, I’m not afraid of competition; for two, it raises my own level; and for three, they do darn good work as a safety net for the common defense. But many people don’t realize that, so when cuts happened recently—and rightfully so, overdue in climate-related excesses—other aspects should have been evaluated objectively by outsiders who know what’s valuable. For instance, I would have loved to weigh in on precisely what to cut in research and development. You wouldn’t gut R&D in defense, would you? No, because that could be suicidal for our country. Well, consider that normal weather variations, in a growing nation, will naturally cause more problems. So, aren’t we compelled to develop better tools to prepare? You can’t achieve that by haphazardly declaring, “Oh, we don’t need this or that.” In my opinion, there may have been a rush to judgment to impress the higher-ups,  as you can’t wield a blunt instrument on something like this—instead, use a surgeon’s precision.

On the other hand, some of the shrill hysterics talking about how many lives this or that would cost, or using individual events, are simply the creatures that haunt the swamp that weather has become due to politics,  and come out when it suits their purpose. And they do a disservice to the reality of looking at what actually should be scrutinized, and who knows, PERHAPS BEEFED UP..

But in the end, I blame it all on the phony climate war agenda. The constant drumbeat about how the climate is deteriorating so badly, this disaster and that calamity, needing more research to prove this and that about climate change blah blah blah—and what happens? Nobody recognizes the true treasure buried within parts of NOAA.

And by the way, this applies to NASA, too. In some ways, a Saturday Night Live skit from years ago, could have sounded alarm bells at NASA. It was a phony phone call from the president to the space shuttle crew, and nobody cared because it had become so routine. Well, no flight into space is ever routine—NASA is just so damn good that it almost always goes right. But when they dove into climate—naturally, given the money thrown at this phony climate war—guess what? Their main mission gets prostituted, a victim of all this hysteria. I’ve got an idea for NASA, or Elon, or whoever: Why not build transports to haul nuclear waste to the far reaches of the universe? How’s that for a mission? Kill two birds with one stone—for all you “CO2 will destroy the atmosphere” fans, nuclear power emits none. And if you could send that waste to the edge of the universe—unless you’re fretting about Klingon retaliation—it seems like an interesting plan.

So, in a way, this is a defense of the National Weather Service and its remarkable work and advancements. If you folks knew what I know and saw what I see, you’d understand. I’ll give you an example: If you’re an Alabama fan, no way do you want Auburn off your schedule. In fact, if you’re a true Alabama fan, you probably want Auburn to come in undefeated every year, so you can beat them. Or vice versa if you’re an Auburn fan. But you should appreciate the value, and the only way to do that is not to let it be prostituted by some phony issue that blinds you to something of true worth.

Think of it in terms of all the great people we have working in the FBI, not where their politically motivated superiors were misdirecting them too.

I know what the weather has done and can do. ( What would we do if the 1930s showed up again? can you imagine the hysteria for instance, if 2 major hurricanes hit the US within 18 hours of each other, with this crew of climate hysterics we have.. all of them not even knowing that happened)? A growing country needs to counter any attack on it that can hinder growth.  If you look at it that way, and look at the National Weather Service as a vital part of the safety net, then the whole picture emerges.  As for the emphasis on man-made climate change, goodbye and good riddance.  If NOAA’s emphasis had been on the front-line forecasting, it’s likely people would know more about what is going on and we would be even better. Maybe our flagship forecast models wouldn’t trail the Europeans as I showed in a previous blog.

But then again, that has always been the main motive of the climate campaign.  Deception, distortion, and delusion.   And the NWS may have suffered some collateral damage in that war.