In a replay of last year's weather pattern, the U.K. is once again in the grips of a Global Warming Climate Change-induced record cold snap.
Not to worry. Those industrious Brits had the foresight to build wind farms with rated capacity equal to 5% of the country's electricity needs.
But they're getting only 1.6% of their electricity from the wind farms. Because...
Extreme wintertime cold comes from high pressure weather systems. And high pressure weather systems don't generate much wind. Not much wind = not much wind energy.
But since the weather is so cold, big mechanical things like wind turbines freeze up. To prevent damage, they need to be thawed out.
This is priceless:
As the temperature has plummeted, the turbines have had to be heated to prevent them seizing up. Consequently, they have been consuming more electricity than they generate.
You don't need a weatherman to know which way the wind blows
The Met Office’s predictions are based on a computer model which assumes ever-rising temperatures — so much so that it forecast that this winter would be significantly milder than the past two years.
Even though the winters of 2008 and 2009 were ferociously cold, they were dismissed as ‘random events’. The Met Office put the odds on a third harsh winter no higher than 20-1.
Those responsible for keeping our transport network running were stupid enough to swallow this bogus, optimistic forecast, and consequently failed to make proper provision for the blizzards which duly followed. ...
Needless to say, the head of the Met Office is not even a weatherman. He’s a leading ‘climate change activist’ who buys into the propaganda pumped out by the fanatics at the University of East Anglia’s Climatic Research Unit (CRU) — exposed for blatantly suppressing evidence which contradicts their messianic belief in ‘global warming’.
Back in 2000, the CRU’s Dr David Viner told The Independent that winter snowfalls would soon be a thing of the past.
‘Children just aren’t going to know what snow is,’ he predicted confidently.
Even when they are proved wrong, the warmists will never admit it. They simply move the goalposts — which is how global warming morphed into ‘climate change’.
Back in the olden days, the Scientific Method worked like this: you made a prediction based on a hypothesis, then tested the prediction. If it was false, you scrapped that hypothesis & went back to the drawing board for a new hypothesis. Now, when the facts are 180 degrees opposite the prediction, the
hypothesis dogma stands unchallenged, and a new explanation is fabricated to wrap around and reckoncile with the contrary observations.