|
nChrist
|
 |
« on: September 08, 2017, 04:21:28 PM » |
|
________________________________________
The Patriot Post Digest 9-8-2017
From The Federalist Patriot
Free Email Subscription
________________________________________
The Patriot Post® · Mid-Day Digest
Sep. 8, 2017 · https://patriotpost.us/digests/51189
IN TODAY’S EDITION
Florida braces for Hurricane Irma, but is climate change to blame?
Trump is talking with Democrats about eliminating the debt ceiling entirely.
Several states sue Trump over ending DACA.
Daily Features: Top Headlines, Cartoons, Columnists and Short Cuts.
THE FOUNDATION
“We know the race is not to the swift nor the battle to the strong. Do you not think an angel rides in the whirlwind and directs this storm?” —John Page (1776)
FEATURED ANALYSIS
Hurricane Irma and the Dubious Climate Change Link1
By Jordan Candler
This weekend, Floridians will be bracing for another tropical impact just weeks after Hurricane Harvey2 hit Texas as a Category 4 storm. This week, Hurricane Irma solidified itself as the strongest hurricane to develop in the Atlantic (important note: this excludes the Gulf of Mexico and Caribbean). At one point, the storm exhibited 185 m.p.h. sustained winds — easily Category 5 strength — and provided stunning satellite imagery of a structure more reminiscent of a Pacific super typhoon (ironically, the typically busy Pacific is currently without a single named storm). As of this writing, south Florida appears to be the virtually certain landfall destination, but several states over the South will feel its effects.
To be clear, this is a dangerous weather pattern right now, and it demands the appropriate media coverage and preparation. Which is to say: If you’re in the path, leave. Sadly, though, this also means more climate hyperbole and sensationalism. Those under the impression that this late summer’s hurricane frenzy is unimaginable should think again. One reason it may seem so is because the U.S. has become accustomed to a fairly remarkable lull in strong landfalling hurricanes. Moreover, it’s September — the peak of the hurricane season. If strong hurricanes are going to develop in rapid succession, this is naturally when you would most expect to see them.
Let’s juxtapose the current time period with the mid 1900s. Patriot Post contributor and meteorologist Joe Bastardi — who, by the way, worries that Irma hasn’t yet achieved its maximum intensity — addressed the question in a May column, “Is This Really the Worst Time Ever?3” In the 1930s, eight major hurricanes (major is defined as Category 3 or higher) hit the U.S. From the 1940s up until 1960, a whopping 19 additional major storms made landfall over the U.S. Tally it all up, and over the span of just 28 years, 27 major hurricanes struck the U.S. Some of those storms went on to make multiple landfalls as a major hurricane. For example, Donna, in 1960, hit the U.S. three times as a Category 3 or higher. Florida was the predominant target in the ‘40s. Consider how a repeat of the 1930s-1950s would be interpreted today.
We already have a clue: Irma — because of its strength — is being blamed on climate change. For example, Bloomberg, under the headline “Hurricane Irma Made Worse by Climate Change, Scientists Say4,” claims: “Climate change didn’t cause Hurricane Irma, the most powerful storm to form in the open Atlantic Ocean, but did make it much stronger, scientists in Germany and the U.K. said.” And climate blowhard Bill “The Science Lie” Nye added, “It’s the strength that is almost certainly associated with global warming.”
Perhaps then he’d like to explain why the U.S. went 12 years between major hurricane strikes? Was that also the result of climate change, or is it more accurately described as a cyclical outcome? As the Cato Institute’s Ross McKitrick writes5 in the Washington Examiner, the climate-link rhetoric unscrupulously allows scientists to have their cake and eat it too. “The climate alarmists offer a vague prediction: Hurricanes may or may not happen in any particular year, but when they do, they will be more intense than they would have been if GHG [greenhouse gas] levels were lower,” McKitrick notes. “This is a convenient prediction to make because we can never test it. It requires observing the behaviour of imaginary storms in an unobservable world. Good luck collecting the data.”
Importantly, McKitrick adds, “Science needs to be concerned not only with conspicuous things that happened, but with things that conspicuously didn’t happen. Like the famous dog in the Sherlock Holmes story, the bark that doesn’t happen can be the most important of all.” In the days ahead, there will be heart-wrenching stories as Irma traverses the lower East Coast. But keep in mind, “You’re also talking about 2 of the most flood-prone cities in the U.S. — Miami & Charleston,” observes meteorologist Eric Fisher. “Both flood during full moons let alone storms.” Hurricanes, like any other weather event, require context.
Climate records show not just similarly major hurricanes but an onslaught of them. The world is also much different today: bigger buildings and populations, as well as better technology and communication. And for the most part that’s a good thing. As Danish statistician and author of “The Skeptical Environmentalist” Bjorn Lomborg writes6, “Because we’re much richer and better protected, death rates from hurricanes in the US have declined dramatically. Even the 1800+ terrible deaths from Katrina in 2005 constitute more of an average hurricane risk in the early part of last century.”
Unfortunately, these tools also give climate extortionists the perfect storm to spread climate rhetoric that erroneously links man-made emissions to tropical systems. Even most scientific establishments that adhere to man-made global warmism are hesitant to make that leap. Keep this in mind as you pray for and aid our beleaguered fellow Americans over the coming days.
IN BRIEF
Just Get Rid of the Debt Ceiling?7
One of the results from Donald Trump’s decision to side with Democrats8 on connecting the Hurricane Harvey relief package with raising the debt ceiling was an agreement that the debt ceiling should be eliminated altogether. White House Press Secretary Sarah Huckabee expressed Trump’s position on the issue, stating, “The president encouraged congressional leaders to find a more permanent solution to the debt ceiling so the vote is not so frequently politicized.” House Majority Leader Paul Ryan (R-WI) argued against the idea, saying, “I think the debt limit should be used to try to bring reform in Congress. I think the debt limit is a good vote to have.”
Trump’s plan isn’t good news for fiscal conservatives, but it’s not surprising news either. From an ideological perspective, Trump isn’t a fiscal conservative, and thus his stance on the debt ceiling doesn’t look good. Concerns over too much government spending and a ballooning national debt leading to an eventual crisis are real. Hence the logic behind the debt ceiling. However, practically speaking, the debt ceiling has proven to be little more than a minor speed bump, good only for providing regularly repeated moments of political grandstanding and partisan bickering threatening government shutdowns, all the while the spending continues and the debt grows. Political theater vs. actual solutions.
Trump is clearly not an ideologue, and his frustration with Republicans over their inability to repeal ObamaCare has given him license to seek solutions across the political aisle. Practically speaking, this consideration by Trump makes sense, and it removes an obstacle for Republicans in the future. The growing debt problem most certainly needs to be addressed, but the debt ceiling has proven inadequate for the task.
15 States Sue Trump Over Rescinding DACA9
In America, we are witnessing a dangerous trend of elected leaders who spurn laws with which they disagree in favor of their own emotion-based “morals.” When Donald Trump rescinded10 Barack Obama’s unconstitutional Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) executive order, several elected officials on both sides of the aisle seemingly lost all objectivity on the Constitution’s designed separation of powers. Their arguments amounted to emotional agonizing over the situation for these “Dreamers,” while little perspective was offered as to how this whole problem was created. Honestly, for those members of Congress blaming Trump, their ire is misplaced. They should be blaming themselves for not passing legislation and Obama for unconstitutionally implementing a law they didn’t pass. |
