Phil, I respectfully disagree.

EVENT

I find myself in the same position as Rolling Stone magazine was when they decided to endorse Gore over Nader for the 2000 election.

That is, I've always liked Punxatawney Phil. He's got an up front attutude, and his response to his competition (which is so much Cialis to his Viagra) has been to ignore them as simply below his dignity. The success of this approach is transparently clear, as Phil copycats never have attracted much press worldwide.

Moreover, historically, he's been remarkably accurate. I remember just last year when I staked so much pride on Phil's declaration that there'd be six more weeks of winter, while New Yorkers were flocking to Staten Island Chuck's prediction that spring was right around the corner. Clearly Chuck was playing the numbers... a succession of record-breaking warm years suggested he'd best hedge his bets by diagnosing spring. He was wrong, however, and the glory went to Phil.

At his best, Phil has always combined the most nuanced application of meterological forecasting as mitigated by the shadow effect, and this care, investment, and harmonic sympathy has borne out in his predictions.

All that aside, I can't stand by Phil this year. He said:

It is said that imitation is the sincerest form of flattery.
Around the country there are many imitators of me.

In Harrisburg there is Gus who appears on TV
working for the lottery.

Then all around town,
Cute groundhog statues abound.
They all look like me, I found.

Today on the Knob as I'm doing my job,
I don't like this likeness of me.

It's my shadow I see. Six more weeks of mild winter there will be.

Clearly a bit overconfident by his surprise victory last year, Phil doesn't realize that you can take tradition too far. He's clearly throwing his (considerable) weight completely behind the Shadow effect, and while the purity of this approach is admirable, it's remarkably, even jarringly, clear that with the jet stream north of the Canadian border all January coming off of a record warm 2005, including in Pennsylvania itself, that only a nuclear winter or a climate catastrophe could enable Phil's prediction to come true.

Another thought struck me as well... has someone's deep pockets found their way to Phil? Has an Abraham come forth with fistfulls of particularly golden corn? After all, if the most reputable groundhog in the nation starts declaring winter when it is clearly not so, could this be construed as a credible argument against global warming? If so, kiss your emmissions standards goodbye.

Myself, I'm too loyal to Phil to cast my lot it with any of those other 'hogs.

At the same time I have to give Phil a vote of no confidence this time around, and implore him to consider science and precendent when making his annual predictions.

Phil -- maybe next year you should set the shadow aside and take a look at the sky.

END OF POST.