The first line claimed that Biden “used the tragedy to further his own beliefs on climate change.”
No, the president was nuanced and accurate.
When asked by reporters if he could conclude that the tornadoes had been due to climate change, he’d said that it was too early to know for sure. He said that he planned to (gasp!) seek the advice of experts.
Then there was those who rushed to social media to jeer at Rand Paul and Mitch McConnell, both senators for Kentucky, for past stinginess when authorizing help for other communities in times of disaster also deserve chastising.
NPR, among others, came out with the incredibly clearheaded, spot-on article, which was headlined: “The exact link between tornadoes and climate change is hard to draw. Here’s why.”
Scientists say that it’s far from clear how tornadoes might be, or if they are, directly affected by the human-induced warming of the planet. But they suspect that the intensity and frequency of the tornadoes might be impacted.
Did the uncertainty of that statement make you cringe?
Remember that feeling. It could be a reaction to guide how you absorb information.
Scientists are constantly learning more about climate change and how it affects our weather. And for people who are extremely linear thinkers, sometimes shifting information means it’s suspicious information. They’re uncomfortable with differing answers all being correct, depending upon what was known at the time.
