The worst winter I’ve experienced by far was my senior year of college, when every day brought either a foot of snow, bone-chilling negative temperatures, or ice so thick it took nearly an hour to scrape and melt off the windshield of my beat-up Camry.
This winter doesn’t look like it’ll be much better. Thanksgiving weekend brought a massive snowfall and all of the fun road conditions that come with it, including a pile-up on I-94 near Hartford a dozen cars deep. My dad has already had to use his snowblower twice, and the Christmas tree isn’t even up yet.
It’s winters like these that make us long for global warming. Screw the polar bears.
Unfortunately, Mother Nature doesn’t seem to care all that much about the climate alarmists or their apocalyptic predictions of rising temperatures. Maybe we need to send Greta Thunberg to the North Pole to get things moving along.
Just last year, Michigan’s climate experts insisted the state’s winters were forever lost to climate change, because it was on average 5 to 10 degrees warmer than normal. Give it another 30 years and Michigan will be “muddy and sodden in the winter,” claimed Richard Rood, a professor emeritus of Climate and Space Sciences and Engineering at the University of Michigan. Daffodils might even bloom in February—gasp!
“Snow in Detroit will be more like snow in North Carolina—a very rare event,” he said.
Now, I’m sure guys like Rood will dismiss me as a climate denier (fact check: true), who ignores the larger pattern of climate change. The problem is this larger pattern is hogwash. In fact, according to scientist Steven Koonin, “The average coldest temperature of the year has clearly increased since 1900, while the average warmest temperature has hardly changed over the last 60 years and is about the same today as it was in 1900.”
Indeed, the evidence supporting the claim that man-made climate change in particular is responsible for temperature trends, natural disasters, and the like is extremely sparse and highly debated. Even the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change admitted it isn’t sure whether man’s contributions to atmospheric climate change, which include the much-maligned greenhouse gas emissions, have had any direct impact at all.
This is especially important since Michigan’s Democratic officials continue full steam ahead with restrictive climate policies meant to address a crisis that literally does not exist. In 2020, for example, Gov. Gretchen Whitmer signed an executive order forcing Michigan to reduce its carbon emissions to zero by 2050.
“The science is clear—climate change is directly impacting our public health, environment, our economy, and our families,” Whitmer said at the time. “This dangerous reality is already causing harm throughout Michigan, with communities of color and low-income Michiganders suffering disproportionately.”
Again, it’s worth looking at the facts. Even if the entire U.S. were to achieve net-zero carbon emissions by 2050, this would only reduce global temperatures by less than 1/1000th of a Celsius degree by 2100. Hardly detectable.
What will be detectable, however, is the immediate economic consequences of Whitmer’s all-or-nothing climate agenda. The Mackinac Center for Public Policy estimates Michigan families will end up paying $2,746 more per year in energy costs as a result of this policy—and for less reliable energy.
Perhaps Whitmer hasn’t noticed, but the clean energy alternatives she’s mandated that the state transition to—solar and wind—only work when the sun is shining and the wind is blowing. Good luck convincing the sun to come out in the Upper Peninsula in February.
Blocking any further climate edicts should be a top priority for Michigan’s new Republican House. That way we can all get back to reality and enjoy Michigan’s winters the way God intended: with fear and loathing, knowing next year will probably be worse.
Kaylee McGhee White is editor-in-chief of Independent Women Features, a Steamboat Institute media fellow, and a columnist for Michigan Enjoyer. Follow her on X @KayleeDMcGhee.
