Can it rain fish? or frogs? or alligators?
This weather phenomenon was probably best imagined in the movie Magnolia (1999, clip below).
When studying weather phenomena, it's a good idea to assume — at least at the outset — that whatever bizarre event has been reported is probably real. Because although it seems hard to embrace the idea of, say, St. Elmo's fire or crimson rains, the truth is that they exist. As do balls of lighting. And blue moons. And pigs flying (Live Science Fishy Rain to Fire Whirlwinds).
All right, let's back up, because it's probably not entirely fair to say that pigs can fly. Unless, of course, they're caught in some sort of tornado-like vortex that sends them sailing through the air. Technically, we'd be seeing flying pigs due to a weather phenomenon (10 Scientifically Sound Weather Superstitions). In much the same way, we can say with some certainty that fish really do rain from the sky.
Although rare, there are numerous instances of fish falling down from the skies. Of course, the fish do not really "rain" in the sense of condensing out of water vapor. The fish that fall from the sky are just fish that used to be in lakes, rivers or the sea. So how do the fish get in the sky?
According to Bill Evans' meteorology book It's Raining Fish and Spiders, creatures fall from the sky about forty times a year. All sorts of creatures have been reported raining down, including snakes, worms, and crabs, but fish and frogs are the most common. Even squid and alligators have been reported to fall from the sky.
Often, the process of being swept high into the clouds encases these creatures in a layer of ice or hail that may still remain after they have plummeted back to earth. Raining creatures encased in blocks of ice can be very dangerous and have been known to smash through car windshields.
That brings us to this. . . .
 |
La Unión, a small rural community in Honduras, where residents report an annual “rain fish” and where, four days before, locals recovered silver sardines that had supposedly fallen from the sky.
ADRIANA ZEHBRAUSKAS FOR THE NEW YORK TIMES
|
By KIRK SEMPLE
JULY 16, 2017, The New York Times
YORO, Honduras — Things don’t come easy in La Unión, a small community on the periphery of Yoro, a farming town in north-central Honduras.
Poverty is universal, jobs are scarce, large families are crammed into mud-brick homes and meals often are constituted of little more than the subsistence crops residents grow — mainly corn and beans.
But every once in a while an amazing thing happens, something that makes the residents of La Unión feel pretty special.
It happens every year — at least once and often more, residents say — during the late spring and early summer. And only under specific conditions: a torrential downpour, thunder and lightning, conditions so intense that nobody dares to go outside.
Once the storm clears, the villagers grab buckets and baskets and head down the road to a sunken pasture where the ground will be covered in hundreds of small, silver-colored fish.
 |
Residents of La Unión say that every year during the months of May through August, a heavy storm will form, and the following day fish are found scattered over a field.
ADRIANA ZEHBRAUSKAS FOR THE NEW YORK TIMES
|
For some, it is the only time of the year they will have a chance to eat seafood.
“It’s a miracle,” explained Lucio Pérez, 45, a farmer who has lived in the La Unión community for 17 years. “We see it as a blessing from God.”
Mr. Pérez has heard the various scientific theories for the phenomenon. Each, he says, is riddled with uncertainty.
“No, no, there’s no explanation,” he asserted, shaking his head. “What we say here in Yoro is that these fish are sent by the hand of God.”
The phenomenon has happened in and around the town for generations, residents say, from time to time shifting locations. It migrated to La Unión about a decade ago.
“Nobody elsewhere thinks it rains fish,” said Catalina Garay, 75, who, with her husband, Esteban Lázaro, 77, raised nine children in their adobe home in La Unión. “But it rains fish.”
Some residents attribute the occurrence to the prayers of Manuel de Jesús Subirana, a Catholic missionary from Spain who in the mid-1800s, asked God to help ease the Yoro region’s hunger and poverty. Soon after he issued his plea, the legend goes, the fish rain began.
Mr. Subirana’s remains are buried in the city’s main Catholic church, on Yoro’s central square.
“The people loved him a lot,” said José Rigoberto Urbina Velásquez, Yoro’s municipal manager. “There are so many stories about him that you’d be surprised.”
Scientifically inclined residents posit that the fish may dwell in subterranean streams or caverns. These habitats overflow during big rainstorms, and the rising water flushes the fish to ground level. Once the rain stops and the flooding recedes, the fish are left stranded.
Another theory is that water spouts suck the fish from nearby bodies of water — perhaps even the Atlantic Ocean, about 45 miles away — and deposit them in Yoro. (In that way, fish would indeed fall from the sky, but the hypothesis does not explain how the spouts score direct hits on the same patches of turf year after year.)
If anyone has done a scientific study of the phenomenon, it is not widely known here. And anyway, a fair number of townspeople probably would not want one.
For them, religion provides the necessary explanation.
“The people have an intense faith,” said Mr. Urbina, who embraces the more scientific explanations for the phenomenon. “You can’t tell them ‘no’ because it will anger them.”
 |
Esteban Lozaro and Catalina Garay in their home in La Unión.
ADRIANA ZEHBRAUSKAS FOR THE NEW YORK TIMES
|
Nobody has actually seen a fish fall from the sky, but residents say that is only because nobody dares leave home during the kinds of powerful storms that bring the fish.
“It’s a secret that only our Lord knows,” said Audelia Hernández Gonzalez, the pastor at one of four evangelical churches in La Unión. “It’s a great blessing because this comes from the heavens.”
“Look,” she continued, “people who are least able to eat fish can now eat fish.”
The harvest becomes a communal affair for La Union’s 200 or so homes, and everyone shares in the bounty. Those who collect the most redistribute their fish to families who are unable to get to the field in time to collect their share, the pastor said.
Peddling the catch is prohibited. “You can’t sell the blessing of the Lord,” she explained.
The phenomenon has become intricately woven into the identity of Yoro and its population of about 93,000.
“For us it’s a source of pride,” said Luis Antonio Varela Murillo, 65, who has lived his entire life in the town. “When we identify ourselves, we say, ‘I’m from the fish rain place.’”
“What we don’t like is that a lot of people don’t believe it,” he added. “They say it’s pure superstition.”
 |
Catalina Garay held bones from fish that supposedly fell during the storm a few days earlier and were cooked and eaten by the family.
ADRIANA ZEHBRAUSKAS FOR THE NEW YORK TIMES
|
For about two decades, the occurrence has been celebrated in an annual festival that features a parade and a street carnival. Young women compete to be elected Señorita Lluvia de Peces — Miss Fish Rain; the winner of the pageant rides a parade float dressed like a mermaid.
Yet, beyond the festival, there are no indicators in town of the phenomena’s central importance: no monuments, no plaques, no fish-shaped souvenirs on sale at shops around town.
Mr. Urbina said that the previous municipal administration had a golden opportunity to do something meaningful. Planners had drawn up a design for a fountain that would be illuminated at night.
But in place of a fountain, officials erected a sculpture of a mushroom — perplexing many.
“I don’t know what happened, but a mushroom appeared,” Mr. Urbina said.
Even if the municipality has underplayed the marketing potential of the fish rain, however, the Catholic Church has not.
In 2007, an office of the Jesuits in St. Louis conducted a fund-raising campaign that included a solicitation letter evoking the fish rain.
“Each gift, each prayer, is like one of the ‘peces’ found during each year’s ‘Rain of Fish,’” the letter said, using the Spanish word for fish. “And every one of these blessings, no matter how large or small, will bring much-needed relief to someone in need.”
The Jesuits have maintained a longstanding mission in Yoro.
The Rev. John Willmering, one of the mission’s current priests, is an American from St. Louis who has been living in Honduras for 49 years, much of that time in Yoro.
When he first moved to the Yoro region, he said, the population was majority Catholic. But since then, he said, the Catholic Church has “lost some ground.” The population is now about a third Catholic, he estimated, with the rest split roughly between evangelicals and those who adhere to no religion.
He is coy on the subject of the fish rain, allowing plenty of room for the townspeople’s religious explanations.
“I think most people who would investigate it would say there is a scientific explanation for it,” he said, choosing his words carefully.
But in the absence of such investigations, he continued, faith can fill the gap.
“It works with natural phenomenon when you need it,” he said, the suggestion of a smile tugging at the corner of his mouth. “I mean, God is behind everything.”
A full-fledged housing crisis has gripped California, marked by a severe lack of affordable homes and apartments for middle-class families. The median cost of a home here is now a staggering $500,000, twice the national cost. Homelessness is surging across the state.
Follow Phillip
on instagram
on facebook
on twitter
on YouTube
We've Read:
Magic Photographer, Cinematographer, Choreographer, Special Fx Artist
The Trump-Russia Circus
Is it all a distraction so we don't notice they're taking away the social safety net?
Or is something more nefarious afoot?
It's been a week since the Donald Trump Jr. scandal broke, and the White House and its allies have trotted out a whole bunch of different defenses — some of them only suggestive — from the 39-year-old's age to blaming former attorney general Loretta Lynch to the idea that it was only attempted collusion. Over the weekend, President Trump's lawyer even tried to suggest the Secret Service had no problems with the meeting — only to have that argument quickly unravel.
It's getting a little hard to keep track of all it. So below is a scorecard of each one, along with how plausible it is — scored from 0 to 10, with 10 being the most plausible.
1) Donald Trump Jr. is young
“My son is a wonderful young man,” Trump said in Paris last week. “I have a son who's a great young man,” he added later. Aboard Air Force One, he did it twice more: “He's a good boy. He's a good kid.” Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-Utah) called Trump Jr. “a very nice young man.” And an anonymous Trump friend told The Post that Trump Jr. was “an honest kid” who just wanted to hunt, fish and run the family business. The biggest problem here is that Trump Jr. is going to be over the hill before the calendar hits 2018. He has been an adult longer than he was ever a “kid,” and in fact he's the same age, 39, as the president of France next to whom Trump made the first two comments above. The suggestion here seems to be that Trump Jr. was out of his depth and didn't know better.
Plausibility rating: 1 out of 10. You can argue, perhaps, that Trump Jr. was a *political newcomer* who didn't know how the whole thing worked. But the idea that he's just a kid who should be given a pass is a pretty remarkable and subtle admission that this was bad. Also, the law generally doesn't allow exceptions for well-meaning and youthful adults, and being unaware of the law isn't a valid defense. We'll give it a 1 because perhaps it plays in the court of public opinion, but the implication is still that Trump Jr. just wasn't smart enough.
2) The Secret Service didn't stop it
Trump's personal lawyer, Jay Sekulow, tried this one out during his appearance on ABC's “This Week” on Sunday. “I wonder why the Secret Service — if this was nefarious — why the Secret Service allowed these people in,” Sekulow said. “The president had Secret Service protection at that point, and that raised a question with me.” The main problem with this one is that the White House has said Trump wasn't in the meeting, and Donald Trump Jr. didn't have Secret Service protection at the time, in June 2016. The Secret Service said after Sekulow's comments that it thus “would not have screened anyone he was meeting with at that time.”
Plausibility rating: 0 out of 10. This was a very bad moment for Sekulow, who has regularly struggled to defend his client.
3) Loretta Lynch let the Russian lawyer into the U.S.
This one got a presidential push last week while Trump was in France. “Somebody said that her visa or her passport to come into the country was approved by Attorney General [Loretta] Lynch,” Trump said. “Now, maybe that's wrong, because I just heard about that a little while ago, but I was a little surprised to hear that: She's here because of Lynch.” Well, it does appear to be wrong. It was based of a report in the Hill that said the Justice Department granted Natalia Veselnitskaya entry into the United States for the limited purpose of helping a Russian businessman with a matter before the DOJ. But this setup — labeled “immigration parole” — is actually the domain of the Department of Homeland Security, not the DOJ, and a spokesman disputed the report that Lynch was personally involved: “Attorney General Lynch, as the former head of the Justice Department, does not have any personal knowledge of Ms. Veselnitskaya's travel.” What's more, when the June 2016 meeting was held, Veselnitskaya was no longer there on immigration parole, but had reportedly been given a B1/B2 nonimmigrant visa by the State Department — again, not the Justice Department.
Plausibility rating: 1 out of 10. Perhaps Trump's underlying argument is intact — that it was the *Obama administration* that allowed Veselnitskaya into the United States — but that still leaves the question of why that matters. Donald Trump Jr. took the meeting of his own volition, knowing what he was being offered.
4) It didn't yield any useful information
From the very beginning, when it was first reported that this meeting was actually about Trump Jr. seeking opposition research about Hillary Clinton, he and the White House have assured us he got nothing — that the information was a bust. The implication is that perhaps his intent was to collude, but the collusion failed, and thus there was no collusion. And there is a legal logic behind this argument: Some have suggested that the meeting might run afoul of campaign finance law, which prohibits taking foreign contributions. If the information wasn't of value, though, perhaps it wasn't technically a contribution. Of course, we still don't know if he actually didn't get useful information; one person in the meeting, Rinat Akhmetshin, said last week that Veselnitskaya brought a plastic folder with documents allegedly showing illicit money funding the Democratic National Committee. There were no such stories written about this during the 2016 campaign.
Plausibility rating: 5 out of 10. This may actually be a good legal defense when it comes to campaign finance law and the line between intent and actual wrongdoing. But it doesn't really change the fact that Trump Jr. sure seemed to hungry for such information.
5) It's not collusion unless it's extensive or planned
Kellyanne Conway offered this one on Friday. “We were promised systemic — hard evidence of systemic, sustained, furtive collusion that not only interfered with our election process but indeed dictated the electoral outcome,” she said on Fox News. As I noted, Conway was really moving the goal posts here. The suggestion is that it's not really collusion unless it's planned or part of a concerted effort is making basically the same argument as Nos. 1 and 4 above. It's allowing that what Trump Jr. did was bad, but arguing that it could have been much worse. Also, the idea that the collusion must have “dictated the electoral outcome” is a huge stretch.
Plausibility rating: 1 out of 10. Conway's definition of what “we were promised” is quite slanted. And even if it were true, it's kind of immaterial as to whether or not this meeting broke the law.
6) Veselnitskaya was just a lobbyist/not a government lawyer
“Fox and Friends” host Steve Doocy offered this one in that same interview with Conway. “As it turns out, the Russia story is starting to fall apart,” Doocy said, “because it looks like [Veselnitskaya] was just a lobbyist, and she met with a whole bunch of members of Congress and State Department officials” and others. President Trump has offered a similar defense, saying Trump Jr. “took a meeting with a Russian lawyer — not a government lawyer but a Russian lawyer.” Veselnitskaya does not hold an official government title, but that's kind of how things work in Russia. Her interests were clearly aligned with the Kremlin, and she lobbies on its foremost policy goal in the United States: the Magnitsky Act. Former CIA intelligence officer and top Energy Department intelligence staffer Rolf Mowatt-Larssen and others have noted that it follows a familiar pattern for the Russians. “It bears all the hallmarks of a professionally planned, carefully orchestrated intelligence soft pitch designed to gauge receptivity, while leaving room for plausible deniability in case the approach is rejected,” Mowatt Larson wrote in The Post.
Plausibility rating: 2 out of 10. Maybe Veselnitskaya really isn't working for the Kremlin! But to take her and the Kremlin's word for it is pretty intellectually incurious and is asking us all to grant a pretty questionable premise. And at the very least, she was presented to Trump Jr. — multiple times in those emails — as working on behalf of the Russian government. So again, we're asked to separate Trump Jr.'s intent from what he actually succeeded at.
No comments:
Post a Comment