Fairly-clear skies this early Sunday, especially after so much rain falling here-abouts on California’s north coast the last few days — and maybe we’ll catch some rays later.
Alas, the weather…

In the vast-sweep of climate change, weather seems to be the end result of climate on a daily basis. One must understand the difference/inbred-similarities found in climate and weather (via NOAA): ‘Climate is what you expect, weather is what you get.’
And obstructing ways to handle a way-obvious approaching calamity is disturbingly wacky.

Twitter tango of suicidal obstructionism — from International Business Times last week: ‘“Global warming strikes America! Brrrr!” U.S. Rep. Vicky Hartzler, a Missouri Republican, joked Tuesday via Twitter, echoing similar sentiments by climate skeptics from all walks of life.’

(Illustration found here).

Some of the Twitter responses included this straight-up pop: ‘You’re a fucking idiot,‘ and a more-pointed comment next Tweet down: ‘Your lack of knowledge is an embarrassment in an elected official.’
Some pointed out the difference between climate and weather, and at least one other added: ‘An elected official in America said this.’

And speaking of  ‘elected official,’ how about a whole shitload of them. Hidden by other news, like the US Senate Keystone XL pipeline drama, and a host of other shitty stuff, a bunch of corporate-pocketed assholes in the House displayed undignified and blatant ignorance, coupled with complete loss of scruples, morals, ethics and common decency/sense in regards to environmental issues  — and a depressing/disturbing preview of the next couple of years.
From Salon last Wednesday:

H.R. 1422, which passed 229-191, would shake up the EPA’s Scientific Advisory Board, placing restrictions on those pesky scientists and creating room for experts with overt financial ties to the industries affected by EPA regulations.
The bill is being framed as a play for transparency: Rep. Michael Burgess, R-Texas, argued that the board’s current structure is problematic because it  “excludes industry experts, but not officials for environmental advocacy groups.”
The inclusion of industry experts, he said, would right this injustice.
But the White House, which threatened to veto the bill, said it would “negatively affect the appointment of experts and would weaken the scientific independence and integrity of the SAB.”
In what might be the most ridiculous aspect of the whole thing, the bill forbids scientific experts from participating in “advisory activities” that either directly or indirectly involve their own work.
In case that wasn’t clear: experts would be forbidden from sharing their expertise in their own research — the bizarre assumption, apparently, being that having conducted peer-reviewed studies on a topic would constitute a conflict of interest.
“In other words,” wrote Union of Concerned Scientists director Andrew A. Rosenberg in an editorial for RollCall, “academic scientists who know the most about a subject can’t weigh in, but experts paid by corporations who want to block regulations can.”

Any science idiot will tell you warm air holds more moisture — cause and effect via relative humidity. And those crazy snowfalls in Buffalo,NY, this week?
Yesterday, via Live Science:

And yet, the science behind these catastrophic storms suggests that they do not occur despite global warming, but in fact because of it. [Will U.S.-India Summit Bring Historic Climate Action? (Op-Ed )]
“Part of what gave us the record lake-effect snowfall in Buffalo was warm, late-fall lake-surface temperatures that combined with something highly unusual: a 5 sigma event.
“That is, a very unlikely event on the order of 1-in-a-million — a remarkably persistent, anomalous configuration of the jet stream, which brought frigid Arctic air down into the United States so early in the season,” said Michael Mann, professor and director of the Earth System Science Center at Pennsylvania State University.
“The cold winds traveling over the warm moisture-laden lake created a perfect storm of conditions for record lake-effect snow.”
The basic science behind snow and its relationship to climate change is fairly straightforward.
Warmer temperatures cause more water to evaporate into the atmosphere, and warmer air holds more water than cooler air.
The air’s water-holding capacity, in fact, rises about 7 percent with each 1 degree Celsius (1.8 degrees Fahrenheit) of warming.
The warming results in air that becomes supersaturated with water, often bringing drenching rainfall, followed by flooding or, if it is cold enough, heavy and intense snowfall. [Snow in Spring? Why a Cold March Doesn’t Disprove Global Warming ]
…
Paradoxically, winter as a season likely will become shorter as a result of increasing warming, potentially hurting winter recreation areas that depend on tourism, while snow, when it does fall, probably will be heavier.
“Most likely, we will see a shorter snow season but more intense individual snowfall events,” Mann said.

Also sad is climate change, most-likely the gravest problem mankind/humanity has ever faced in at least all of recorded history (and right now, a seemingly unstoppable problem), being considerably worsened by asshole people who obstruct in any form or fashion attempts in understanding/handling a whiplash, increasingly-violent environment. However, looks like a little bit of nonsense can go a long. long way.
Via Environment & Energy Publishing:

Yet the majority of Americans think the worst climate impacts will happen in poorer, less-developed foreign nations, and not in the United States, according to a new survey about religious beliefs and climate change among Americans by the Public Religion Research Institute, or PRRI, and the American Academy of Religion.
Among a pool of 3,000 Americans, 24 percent of respondents said they believe climate change would personally harm them a great deal, while 30 percent said it would harm them moderately.
Forty-five percent of respondents said climate change would inflict little to no harm upon them.

Not the first time the sheep-like, fickle American ‘public was dead wrong‘ on humanitarian reality.
A couple of Tuesdays ago, maybe the latest.