Weathering The Storm

House Republicans have decided that if they pass legislation to simply force NOAA to stop doing climate research, then the problem just goes away from both a scientific and political aspect.

House Republicans want government scientists to focus on predicting storms, not climate change.

The House will vote next week on a Republican bill to require the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) to focus its efforts on storm predictions instead of researching climate change.

Members will consider the Weather Forecasting Improvement Act, H.R. 2413, as early as Tuesday.

Rep. Jim Bridenstine (R-Okla.) introduced his bill last year after tornadoes hit his home state. Those storms led him to argue on the House floor the government spends too much on climate change research and not enough on developing weather forecasting tools to predict tornadoes and other events.

His bill does not explicitly kick the government out of the climate change business. But it does say NOAA must "prioritize weather-related activities, including the provision of improved weather data, forecasts, and warnings for the protection of life and property and the enhancement of the national economy, in all relevant line offices."

Last year, Bridenstine released a statement saying the intent of the bill is to "protect lives and property by shifting funds from climate change research to severe weather forecasting research."

"The bill does not increase spending but rather shifts funding to make improved severe weather forecasting a higher priority of the Federal government," he said in July.

In other words, "tornadoes kill people, climate change is a myth, you can't have money for both."  And of course if you don't support this bill, you want tornadoes to kill schoolkids.  This'll pass the House easily, and probably the Senate.

After all, if we can't predict the exact path of a tornado 12 hours down the road, how can we possibly predict climate, because derp.