So you admit that afterwards analysis is meaningless in your eyes?

Why do you think that these two things are antithetical? You can't look at the causes for an issue without compromising search and rescue? Is that really your position? or would you rather virtue signal. We are two people on a social media platform, neither of us are engaging in search and rescue.

what you just wrote was completely incomprehensible. can you please describe to me what outcome you think that I'm hoping for? because whether or not you believe in the proven reality of climate change, the issue of cutting Federal funding to weather services is still relevant.

You do notice what you just did right? "There will be plenty of time for AAR's after." "Climate change isn't the issue". You've already come to the conclusion that this is just an unavoidable tragedy that couldn't possibly have been affected by massive cuts and layoffs. This is just deflection.

as a Texan, it seems like we have a "one in a hundred years" event every other year.

if you are unwilling to look at the causes for a problem, that problem will simply never be resolved. That's why we will continue to watch our world become less and less habitable due to climate change.

you're still not getting it. You're appealing to the local weather team when the national services are the ones that have been gutted. it's not the local team's job to be climate experts

That's a bit of a reductive argument. NOAA/NWS cuts would be the issue here not the staff in the specific part of Texas. It's also not an issue with the specific amount of employees, the expertise of the employees will have a much larger impact than the number of people overall.