'Houston, we have a dumbass problem'

I’m truly sorry about the title, but nothing else really describes the ridiculousness of the pronouncement by the White House aide John Podesta over these two satellite images in a maddeningly idiotic story from the Washington Post.

snowpack13[1] snowpack14[1]

In a Feb. 24 Oval Office meeting, two of President Obama’s top climate advisers presented these sharply-contrasting images of California’s snowpack on Jan. 13, 2013 (left) and a year later (right), as a way to underscore how global warming is changing conditions on the ground in the United States.

The satellite images viewed by President Obama before a meeting with eight Western governors were stark, showing how snowpack in California’s mountains had shrunk by 86 percent in a single year. 

“It was a ‘Houston, we have a problem’ moment,” recalled White House counselor John D. Podesta, one of two aides who briefed the president that February day. Obama mentioned the images several times as he warned the governors that political leaders had no choice but to cope with global warming’s impact.

After years of putting other policy priorities first — and dismaying many liberal allies in the process — Obama is now getting into the weeds on climate change and considers it one of the key components of his legacy, according to aides and advisers.

 

Story here: http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/for-president-obama-a-renewed-focus-on-climate/2014/05/04/6b81412c-d144-11e3-9e25-188ebe1fa93b_story.html

Gasp! 86% change in a single year. More proof positive that ‘global warming’ is accelerating. /sarc

So tell me, oh geniuses, what will you show the President after the looming El Niño kicks in later this year, and California has a wetter than normal year during the winter of 2014/15 and the snow pack goes up to something like 146% of normal? What then? Blame that on global warming and call it another “Houston we have a problem” moment when we get flooding in California like in 1997/1998 after that big EL Niño changed the weather pattern in a single year to drench the state?

The lack of snowpack in 2014 is all about ENSO and resulting jet stream patterns, something well known for years.

209479main_elnino1_080128_HI[1]

Pattern shifts related to ENSO make California winters highly variable. For example, compare the snowpack change from 1880 to 1881 in the graph below from the Sierra Snow Lab and note some of the other low years highlighted in yellow.

sierra_snow_pack1879-2013

Snowfall and snowpack data from the CSSL archive dating from 1878 to1945, and from 1952 to1957, were measured and supplied by the Southern Pacific Transportation Company. Snowpack and snowfall measurements were taken at Summit Station from 1878 through 1927, and at Norden from 1927 on. From 1879 to 1897, and 1901, the maximum snowpack depth was estimated. Current CSSL methodology mandates that new snow is measured twice a day, at 0800 and 1600 Pacific Standard Time. The depth of the new snow is probed with a rule at the four corners of a snow board. [The snow board is piece of plastic-covered plywood, .25m2 in area.] The four depths are recorded and averaged, the board is then cleaned off and replaced on the snowpack surface.
[Ref: Randall S. Osterhuber, Climatic Summary of Donner Summit, California, Central Sierra Snow Laboratory, October 1993]

Will these geniuses in the White House say global warming reached back through time to 1881 to cause this? How about 1977, was that “global warming” too? But let’s indulge them, let’s say it is ALL caused by ‘global warming’. What will they do about it? Tax it? Issue a presidential order? Make emitting CO2 a crime?

Like Nature cares what they think or do. Idiots.

“Some people are weatherwise, but most people are otherwise.”

— Benjamin Franklin

 

 

 

 

The climate data they don't want you to find — free, to your inbox.
Join readers who get 5–8 new articles daily — no algorithms, no shadow bans.
0 0 votes
Article Rating
188 Comments
bushbunny
May 13, 2014 9:05 pm

Well I don’t think Obama is an idiot, a clever manipulative man, but I have never taken to his wife, as a foreigner of course. Maybe it is because she is so tall, but she seems personal enough. We’ll see who is the next president, Hilary Clinton, I don’t think she will get in. She doesn’t appeal to me.

bushbunny
May 14, 2014 8:18 pm

ROBERT THAT’S WERE YOU ARE RIGHT! INDIRECTLY. Having political or philosophical differences dictates cold hard data to support a hypothesis. To give you a very good example. The Aryan race was linked to fair haired blue eyed Germans, the Aryan race where from the sub continent. Jews were sub human. The final solution. Differences in religious worship and theological questions and belief. The creationist versus the evolutionists. Sarah Palin, ‘humans walked with dinosaurs’. Politics rules human existence, always has. Even between men and women over the ages. And it is my belief and knowledge, that the main driving force between the alarmists and skeptics is not only political but a real scam to try to gain more financial help and political changes for many and they don’t have a case because of poor and deluded data that has driven their philosophical and political agendas. That is why democratic countries separate state from religious doctrines. Theological governments do not.

Robert A Dorrough
Reply to  bushbunny
May 15, 2014 2:21 am

I unequivocally agree, theocracy is not good government. I’m a technocrat myself. This has nothing to do with the subject at hand. I am still formulating my response to ronhave. I request your indulgence.

1 6 7 8