A know-it-all New York Times columnist or a National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration research meteorologist?
New York Times columnist Tom Friedman four days ago:
"I mean, here is the Texas governor rejecting the science of climate change while his own state is on fire — after the worst droughts on record have propelled wildfires to devour an area the size of Connecticut. As a statement by the Texas Forest Service said last week: “No one on the face of this earth has ever fought fires in these extreme conditions.”
NOAA researcher Dr. Robert Hoerling on those same global warming-induced fires in Texas:
"This is not the new normal in terms of drought. Texas knows drought. Texas has been toughened on the anvil of droughts that have come and gone. This is not a climate change drought. What we do anticipate from climate change is a situation where temperatures progressively increase."
Me? I go with the dude who knows what he's talking about.
Besides, what idiot would be influenced by a filthy rich man who tells us all that we need to reduce our carbon footprint in order to save the planet from global warming while, at the same time, produces a carbon footprint that surpasses that of ten thousand of his fellow countrymen?
Uh, never mind.