Global Climate Nuclear what?

Last Friday, May 29, 2015, the Detroit metro area was told to expect torrential rains on the following Sunday, May 31.

On Saturday afternoon May 30, Detroiters were told to expect one to three inches of rain on Sunday.

Early on Sunday morning the weather forecast cast called for a lot of rain starting around Noon, to the tune of 'about an inch'.

By 10 AM, the dire warning had been downgraded to one half an inch. By Noon, we were told to expect a quarter inch of rainfall that day.

But hardly 24 hours before that, Detroit was said to look for several inches of rain. With all the bright new weather technology, how could the forecast change so dramatically in not quite two days? And this is not the first time that the weather casters have been so far off in so short of a time, as the many people who follow weather issues can surely attest. And then - you knew this was coming, we're equally sure - what does this say about the global warming question? How can we trust the predications of those claiming that the weather will change so profoundly over the next, oh, 50 to 100 years if we can't get reliable forecasts for the next two days?

We're not talking here about a subtle change. We're talking about a change of several inches of precipitation within a short time. Yet were's supposed to believe in catastrophic changes to play out over decades.

Call us simplistic, but it is precisely these mistakes, likely enough honestly made under changing conditions, which cause us to question the whole idea of widespread and horrific global warming, climate change, nuclear winter, or whatever it is the doomsayers of today insist will happen in the relatively far off future. Pshaw, we say, to their chicken little clucking.