By Paul Homewood
h/t Ian Magness
Why is a so-called Science Editor allowed to get away with writing drivel like this?
On the face of it there is a clear explanation for the tragedy in Derna.
Two dams across the river that runs through the city were too old and too weak to cope with an unusually heavy rainstorm.
But there’s another story written in the stinking channels of mud that carved through Derna‘s high-rises and low-lying neighbourhoods: that vulnerable places and their people will suffer the most through our failure to recognise and respond to the risks of a rapidly warming climate.
The floods were a direct result of the failure of the two dams up stream of Derna, which were built in the 1970s by a Yugoslavian company (hardly a recipe for success!). Experts say that when the dams broke, 30 million cubic metres of water was released into the city.
Neither dam has had any maintenance for over 20 years.
Before the dams were built, there would only have been minimal flooding of course.
The storm which triggered the collapse was merely a catalyst for a disaster that was waiting to happen, and there is not a single piece of evidence to suggest that climate change had anything to do with it at all.
Instead of printing Clarke’s pack of lies, maybe Sky should have told its viewers the real story:
Clarke goes on to claim that this is an example of how poor countries are most at risk from climate change. What the dolt really means is that they are more vulnerable to all natural disasters, weather and otherwise. That is why it is so important to make their economies richer and infrastructure stronger, by giving them the freedom to use fossil fuels.
That is why the death toll from natural disasters has shrunk to close to zero in recent years: