by Clifford F. Thies
The media have already decided that an impending blizzard, named Nemo, is proof of global warming, I mean, climate change. Never before has there been such a blizzard as this one might be.
According to weather.com, Nemo is forecast to drop 18 to 24 inches of snow in the hardest hit areas. Never before, never before has there been such a blizzard.
Well, there hasn't been a blizzard like this is forecast to be since the Storm of the Century of 1993. I was there. In my part of Virginia, it dumped something like 2 feet of snow, and my family was snowbound in our home then on Paris Mountain for five days. That storm hit practically the entire east coast of the country, from Florida northward.
Well, o.k., so maybe the Blizzard of '78, which dropped 27 inches of snow, was bigger. My goodness, the Blizzard of '78! I was there - Fort Devens, Massachusetts - when that happened. The drifts covering my driveway and lawn were 4 to 6 feet high.
And as for blizzards that I personally didn't experience, what about the Great Blizzard of 1888. That blizzard dropped 40 to 50 inches of snow in New York City and environs, with drifts of up to 50 feet. The region was immobilized for a week. Property damage mounted because fire companies could not respond. More than 400 people perished from exposure and deprivation.
And what about the unusually long period of normal weather that we had before this storm? Just two days ago, a Washington Post blog said, and I quote, "Washington, D.C., has now gone a record 742 days without a two inch of greater snow even." How can anybody deny that an unusually long period of normal weather doesn't prove man-made climate change? Why, just look at the history of snow fall posted in that WAPO blog. Notice how ominously the numbers fluctuate and then, from time to time, don't. Freaky isn't? We better do something before it starts fluctuating again. Or stops fluctuating.
And beside all that, have we ever before had a blizzard named after a fish? "Nemo", doesn't that prove something?