Why are there so many different ways to attach windshield wipers? I just replaced the wipers on my son's Honda Fit, and it took me a while. I bought a set of three wipers made for the Fit, but I had to spend time reading and trying to figure out the directions. I've been putting wipers on cars since the 1960s, but these wipers had 4-step directions that weren't very clear. Once I knew how they worked, it was simple. There were too many moving parts in the fitting, with no obvious way to attach them. I had to lift a little door, raise the piece opposite it, and the slide the wiper arm into place. I got the two front wipers installed easily after understanding the system. For some reason, Honda uses a different system for the rear wiper. It's a simple slide-off-slide-on. I dread the day when I'll have to remove these. 😁

One nice thing - I brought his car to Walt, a local guy. When he was finished, he phoned and said that the wipers needed replacing, and he could do it. I told him that I had the wipers at home (a $19 set of three). A few years ago, I brought my own car to a shop in town. When I picked it up, there was a charge of $63 to replace the wipers. I prefer DIY.

EDITED: Maybe the dealer gave me a break. Here are two wipers for $64, plus tax. The one for the rear costs $50.

https://www.amazon.com/Windshield-Wiper-Blade-Bundle-2010-2013/dp/B013AVC850/ref=sw_ttl_d_sspa_dk_huc_pt_expsub?_encoding=UTF8&pd_rd_i=B013AVC850&pd_rd_w=3NxOU&content-id=amzn1.sym.421156cc-ae17-4608-955b-a8d126cb098e&pf_rd_p=421156cc-ae17-4608-955b-a8d126cb098e&pf_rd_r=G91ST61YYY74SGS36K2P&pd_rd_wg=lSRaF&pd_rd_r=6cc0fbb7-1c36-4b57-ad43-4e805c1c16e1&sp_csd=d2lkZ2V0TmFtZT1zcF9odWNfbXJhaQ==

Bosch Icon wipers are generally rated the best in comparison tests.

Balance is the ideal that we should try to keep in mind. Over population, under population, are both challenges. Too cold, too hot, also challenges.

I am not a scientist, but it does seem clear that warmer than historical temperatures have happened the last few years and will probably continue. Risk is reduced ice caps at the poles, warmer ocean temperatures, more extreme weather patterns. Man made emissions do seem to be a piece of the puzzle. Should we take steps to get man made impacts back in balance? Seems reasonable in my humble opinion.

First it was global cooling would kill us all. Next over population. Then, holes in the ozone, then global warming and acid rain. Then underpopulation. Next Climate change (covers all weather) would get us. Not to be out done, the global panic would kill us all, particularly if you didn't buy and wear their useless masks. The hand wringers have been spouting all this garbage through out my entire 78 years. Oh, I forgot, we be running out of oil sometime in the early '70's.

Everyone should know it's all a bunch of crap, and the truth is space aliens will soon swarm in and eat us all alive...

Investigation has discovered a link between the masking of precipitation by aerosols and effects following the passage of the Clean Air Act.

Sooo: We clean up the air (somewhat) of aerosols and now the OTHER pollution sources (e.g. CO2) are causing more precipitation . . . .

From the article:

”We know that greenhouse gas emissions like carbon dioxide should increase rainfall. The emissions heat the atmosphere, causing a one-two punch: Warmer oceans make it easier for water to evaporate, and warmer air can hold more water vapor, meaning more moisture is available to fall as rain. But for much of the 20th century, that increase in precipitation didn't clearly show up in the data.

”A new study led by researchers at the Department of Energy's Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (Berkeley Lab) finds that the expected increase in rain has been largely offset by the drying effect of aerosols —emissions like sulfur dioxide that are produced by burning fossil fuels, and commonly thought of as air pollution or smog. The research is published in the journal Nature Communications.

"This is the first time that we can really understand what's causing extreme rainfall to change within the continental U.S.," said Mark Risser, a research scientist at Berkeley Lab and one of the lead authors for the study.
He noted that until the 1970s, the expected increases to extreme rainfall were offset by aerosols. But the Clean Air Act caused a drastic reduction in air pollution in the United States. "The aerosol masking was turned off quite suddenly. That means rainfall might ramp up much more quickly than we would have otherwise predicted."
(Emphasis added)

https://phys.org/news/2024-02-air-pollution-offset-rainfall.html?utm_source=nwletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=daily-nwletter

Oh BS, it went from g****l c*****g to g****l w*****g to c*****e c****e and now to the speed of the change. It's all bs nobody knows how fast c*****e c****ed in the past. But even if the climate is changing faster than before, that doesn't mean doesn't mean that human activity contributed to it. I'm not saying that human activity didn't contribute to it it may have I'm just saying we really don't know. There could be multiple reasons or a combination of natural activities. This is all about controlling the population and robbing people of their hard-earned money to support their agenda.