An analysis by the National Climatic Data Center found there is no correlation between Phil's predictions and the actual weather.
The National Climatic Data Center? Please tell me that isn't a government agency. . . ah, crap! They have a .gov web address! Seems like the National Climatic Data Center ought to have bigger fish to fry than determining whether some ridiculous bit of nonsensical folklore involving a rodent might somehow have some shred of veracity in it. (hint: no, it does not)
The well-fed, revered groundhog also has a penchant for seeing his shadow. Ever since the tradition began in 1887, Phil (and his ancestors) saw their shadows 99 times, while predicting an early spring only 16 times. There was no record for nine of the years.
Of course he always sees his shadow! He's not blind. Assuming that it is actually possible to somehow determine what the little guy is actually seeing or not seeing, wouldn't you just assume that he would see his shadow? And the 16 times he supposedly didn't see it, wouldn't that just be an indication that it's time to break in a new groundhog, because this one's losing his eyesight?
But thank God we have a free press in this country so we can read hard-hitting investigative stories like this. ABC News, give this lady a raise!
And don't the crowds wait out there all night for this event? Pretty crazy.
ReplyDeleteYeah, hoping that the Groundhog Accuracy Study didn't cost excessive $$$ to conduct. Sheesh.