According to this report from Al Jazeera: “Emergency shipments of fresh water have begun arriving in Cyprus, to prevent citizens from abandoning the island. A devastating drought has left residents with just seventy days of drinkable water. And while the first shipment has been delivered by Greece, faults in a pipeline mean even further delays.”
Meanwhile, in Iraq…
It’s been a year of drought and sand storms across Iraq — a dry spell that has devastated the country’s crucial wheat crop and created new worries about the safety of drinking water.
U.S. officials warn that Iraq will have to increase wheat imports sharply this winter to make up for the lost crop — a sobering proposition with world food prices high and some internal refugees already struggling to afford food.
“Planting … is totally destroyed,” said Daham Mohammed Salim, 40, who farms 120 acres in the al-Jazeera area near Tikrit, 80 miles north of Baghdad. “Even the ground water in wells is lower than before.”
The Tikrit area, where Saddam Hussein was born, normally is flush with green meadows in the spring and early summer — but this year has only thistles, said 30-year-old farmer Ziyad Sano. He’s resorted to collecting bread scraps from homes to feed his 70 sheep, but about 20 have died.
The dry weather has hurt areas from Kurdistan’s wheat fields in northern Iraq to pomegranate orchards, orange groves and wheat fields just north of Baghdad.
In the capital, the Tigris river is at its lowest level since 2001, with yards of reeds exposed on each bank. Some irrigation canals to the north in Diyala province — the country’s most important bread basket — are bone dry.
This of course has absolutely nothing to do with climate-change.
*With apologies to Harry Shearer
40 Comments
July 10, 2008 at 2:30 pm
Are you serious RT?
Did you do your history before you typed such garbage?
Here is the truth.
History
Droughts have taken place around the world throughout history. Some scientist theorize that droughts brought about the migrations of early humans. From 1876 to 1879, severe droughts in China caused the deaths of millions of people from lack of food. In 1921, a drought along the Volga River basin in Russia led to the deaths of almost five million people, more than the total number of deaths in World War I (1914–18).
The best-known American drought occurred on the Great Plains region during the mid-1930s. Labeled the Dust Bowl, the affected area covered almost 50 million acres in parts of Colorado, New Mexico, Kansas, Texas, and Oklahoma. During this period, dust storms destroyed crops and buried agricultural fields with drifting sand and dust. As depicted by American writer John Steinbeck in his award-winning novel The Grapes of Wrath, many farm families had to abandon their land.
Drought and famine have severely affected areas throughout Africa. Beginning in the late 1960s, in the Sahel region south of the Sahara Desert in northern Africa, a prolonged drought contributed to the deaths of an estimated 100,000 people. The region was struck again by drought in the mid-1980s and early 1990s. War and drought in Ethiopia in the early 1980s brought about the starvation of an estimate one million people and the forced migration of hundreds of thousands of others.
Drought combined with social unrest continued to afflict many countries at the beginning of the twenty-first century. The African nations of Djibouti, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Kenya, Somalia, and Sudan were all hit hard by a massive drought that began in the late 1990s. Conflicts like the
border war between Eritrea and Ethiopia slowed the delivery of famine aid. Devastating civil wars also worsened the effect of drought in the countries of Afghanistan and Tajikistan. The unrelenting droughts were the worst those countries had seen in decades.
The El Niño weather phenomenon typically brings about droughts in various parts of the world as it disrupts normal weather patterns. Perhaps one of the worst such droughts occurred in Southeast Asia as a result of the 1997–98 El Niño period. The monsoon rains that normally drench the area each September were delayed. Consequently, the jungle fires set by farmers to clear land were not damped by the usual rain, but instead raged out of control, propelled by hot winds. The smoke from the fires hung over Southeast Asia like a thick, dirty blanket. It quickly became the worst pollution crisis in world history. At least 1,000 people died from breathing the toxic air; several hundred thousand more were sickened.
RT, droughts have happened throught history and has nothing to do with climate change unless you believe that cglobal warming has been happening for over 150 years.
So here is the link and please wuit it with your alarmist rhetoric. It serves no one to read such balogny.
http://www.scienceclarified.com/Di-El/Drought.html
July 10, 2008 at 2:31 pm
A pity you couldn’t be first .
July 10, 2008 at 2:39 pm
Bill D Cat.
Its’t it absolutely amazing how RT could post something he knows is false.
I mean come on, this RT is 48 years old and he acts like he doesn’t know his history?
I think this post was meant to be a joke but until he verifies it as such, I have to assume he actually believes it.
July 10, 2008 at 2:41 pm
Gee, I’d never heard of droughts before! Thanks for enlightening me!
Oy.
You guys are awfully quick to dismiss these unusual weather events out of hand without possibly considering that there may be some connection to something broader. I’m not saying there is just more that there could be some significance to them.
July 10, 2008 at 2:46 pm
J , the link was aimed at RT . Furthermore , if you be the asshat from a few weeks prior , smarten-up .
July 10, 2008 at 2:51 pm
“without possibly considering that there may be some connection to something broader. I’m not saying there is just more that there could be some significance to them.”
That is the logic that Dion and Suzuki want us to believe.
I have a hard time paying more for everything when people don’t know for sure whether global warming is true or not.
Not just that RT, but if you read the link Bill D Cat gave you, you wuld see that India don’t even believe in global warming.
Indians say that their temp. has only increased 0.4 degrees in the last century.
My point is this. Is it really worth paying more for everything when China and India don’t even believe in climate change.
I not prepared to buy that rhetoric seeing Canada is responsible for only 2% of global emissions.
Even if you are right about climate change RT, you also have to understand that without China and India on board with redcutions, our lives are over.
Now that’s a fact.
July 10, 2008 at 2:54 pm
The problem , as always , will be words ….. like …..may , is , and could . Policy formulated on if ’s always end badly .
July 10, 2008 at 2:55 pm
Bill — JK seems to think that I’m advancing some theory or that I believe this is conclusive evidence of climate change. Far from it. I still remain somewhat skeptical about the whole notion. However, it is one of those things you tuck away for later consideration when summing up the case for/against the proposition that we are possibly in the midst of “global warming.” Kind of like the ice dissipating around the North Pole. JK won’t find that in any history books!
July 10, 2008 at 2:58 pm
Whoa , there RT , I was under the impression all of this was settled .
July 10, 2008 at 2:58 pm
“The problem , as always , will be words ….. like …..may , is , and could . Policy formulated on if ’s always end badly .”
And Dion wants us to pay more for everything for one of his…..may….ifs…..and coulds.
I really honestly believe Dion hasn’t bit the global waming hook but he is trying to win votes to fund his poverty plan.
I can’t fathom why anyone could believe his climate hype when all the evidence points to the fact he is not correct.
India’s temp. is only up 0.4 degrees since last century and that is the norm throughout the world.
Global warming will be proven to be the greatest hoax ever.
It might take 2 years or 50 years, but it will be proven to be untrue.
July 10, 2008 at 3:03 pm
RT, I really, really, really , appreciate the debate. That’s what people do when they want to try to settle something.
You said this,”This of course has absolutely nothing to do with climate-change.”
When someone reads that like I did, one has to assume your being a smart a** by trying to imply that “,”This of course has absolutely nothing to do with climate-change.”
You admitted to being skeptical of global warming. That’s a good baby step. Now will you also agree that paying alot more money for everything when you admitted your skeptical is not really worth it?
I really feel bad for people that want to pay more for everything when they don’t even know 100% if its going to have any impact.
RT , are you a millionaire, and is that why you support the GReen Shift?
No one like me who lives month to month can afford Dion’s plan.
July 10, 2008 at 3:03 pm
A simple question for the host .
Are CO2 and pollution one and the same ?
July 10, 2008 at 3:18 pm
According to Environment Canada CO2 is listed as a pollutant. I believe the SCOTUS has yet to rule on this in the U.S. It was previously listed as such by the Clinton administration, then overturned under Bush and it’s not under appeal. Does that answer your question?
July 10, 2008 at 3:18 pm
s/b now under appeal. No bloody preview on this thing.
July 10, 2008 at 3:20 pm
No , it does not . I did not ask any of the above , I asked you .
July 10, 2008 at 3:23 pm
No , it does not . I did not ask any of the above , I asked you .
What the fuck are putting up with this for, Red?
July 10, 2008 at 3:25 pm
Putting up with what ?
July 10, 2008 at 3:28 pm
JK — This won’t be “settled” by “debating” the issue here and I’m most certainly not the person you want to be arguing with on this matter. You need to get someone more passionate about it that I am for the full enjoyment of getting into a heated tussle over AGW, whether it exists and how best to tackle it, if at all, and so on. It’s really not something that interests me terribly, to be quite honest. I find too much of the information conflicting and the proposed “solutions” rather dubious at best. I do think we need to get away from fossil fuels and the sooner we start moving in that direction the better.
July 10, 2008 at 3:31 pm
Bill — I’m not a scientist, are you? Whether I think it’s pollution or not is neither here nor there. I will leave it up to the “experts” to decide that. People who are actually qualified to make these decisions based on the facts and evidence within the framework of the law and environmental regulations.
July 10, 2008 at 3:33 pm
I find too much of the information conflicting and the proposed “solutions” rather dubious at best. I do think we need to get away from fossil fuels and the sooner we start moving in that direction the better.
Well put .
July 10, 2008 at 3:33 pm
“I do think we need to get away from fossil fuels and the sooner we start moving in that direction the better.”
I agree 100% that we need to get off oil as it produces smog and gives people ahsma and other debilitating diseases.
However, getting rid of oil won’t be easy.
That being said, if our government would say we need to get rid of oil for health sake, I would agree.
But I think its garbage to say the world is over in 25 years if we dont reduce our oil buring.
They are two different areas.
I do agree that we should get rid of oil for our own sake, not humanities.
July 10, 2008 at 3:42 pm
Am I a scientist ? No . As far as leaving it up to the experts , again , sorry , no . And as far as neither here nor there , alas , that is the question ….. a crucial one , for all involved .
July 10, 2008 at 3:48 pm
I’m also not inclined to perform my own surgeries.
There are some things that have to be left to “experts” although when it comes to macro-economics, that proposition becomes rather more untenable. Or at least, having faith in them being any better at estimating the potential outcome of their meddling than you or I might be.
But let me return to your question and ask why you feel it’s important that I have personal opinion on the matter? How would this affect anything?
July 10, 2008 at 4:02 pm
But let me return to your question and ask why you feel it’s important that I have personal opinion on the matter?
I need answers …… before I make decisions .
July 10, 2008 at 4:12 pm
BTW , the three eyed crab is awesome .
July 10, 2008 at 4:12 pm
You’re being rather cryptic there. Care to explain? Answers about what, from whom, with regards to…?
July 10, 2008 at 4:18 pm
1. climate change
2. non-agenda scientists
3. see 1.
July 10, 2008 at 4:19 pm
Meteorologists warn against attributing any usual weather to global warming, so I shy away from pointing at this or that and saying “See…”
At the same time, increasing levels of atmospheric CO2 at the Mauna Kea Observatory has been clearly documented over the past 60 years. CO2 is a greenhouse gas. That is what makes Venus hotter than Mercury despite being nearly twice the distance from the Sun. Saying there is no connection between adding CO2 gas to the atmosphere and the changing climate is absurd IMO. It ignores the laws of physics.
The rising acidity of the ocean which is bleaching corals in Australia and the South Pacific and the migration of the Horticultural Zones northward are the clearest indications to me that there is a correlation between the change in the atmosphere’s composition and climate. Sadly, it may take the death of the Great Barrier Reef which the Australians seem to think is a certainty, to end the debate. You can’t call that part of a normal climate cycle.
There is absolutely no doubt in my mind that human caused climate change is real and will cause huge problems for us in the decades to come. But, as I have mentioned [like a broken record sadly], the effect of peak oil on the economy is going to become the big driver to move us off oil in the years to come. More and more see our dependence on oil as the biggest threat to our way of life. That seems more real to people on the street than the vagueness of climate change. It shows up on gas stations signs all across the country.
July 10, 2008 at 4:28 pm
increasing levels of atmospheric CO2 at the Mauna Kea Observatory has been clearly documented over the past 60 years.
….much like the contributions of volcano’s to atmospheric CO2 levels ……
July 10, 2008 at 4:42 pm
There is no evidence that worldwide volcanic activity has increased over the past 100 years, or that volcanoes are responsible for the increase in CO2.
We KNOW humans are putting much of it into the atmosphere through combustion. Again, you’d have to ignore the laws of physics to believe that the burning doesn’t release CO2 gas into the atmosphere. A simple lab experiment shows otherwise.
July 10, 2008 at 4:42 pm
Sorry , hold on , I was being cryptic . Dan , there is a long history of volcano’s on the Hawaiian islands . Apparently volcano’s are worse than cigarettes for
Gaia ….. if you know what I mean .
July 10, 2008 at 4:43 pm
See: http://www.volcano.si.edu/faq/index.cfm?faq=06
July 10, 2008 at 4:47 pm
I think volcanism is necessary for life on this planet. It is part of the atmospheric recycling process. Many scientists believe the reason Mars’ atmosphere is so thin is because of the lack of volcanism on that planet.
July 10, 2008 at 4:49 pm
If we’re going to ignore scientific facts , how about atmospheric CO2 levels ……… do they lead , or follow temperature increases , globally ?
July 10, 2008 at 5:05 pm
Ugh. Everybody’s a climatologist. *groan*
July 10, 2008 at 5:08 pm
I have a hard time paying more for everything when people don’t know for sure whether global warming is true or not.
Maybe you should write to little Stevie Harper and complain about his corporate welfare to BioFuels then…
July 10, 2008 at 5:09 pm
Ugh. Everybody’s a climatologist. *groan*
These assmonkeys believe Tim Ball – he only plays a climatologist….
July 11, 2008 at 4:31 pm
“This of course has absolutely nothing to do with climate-change.”
If one believes the liberal media, virtually everything and anything is caused (directly, or indirectly, or accidentally) by global warming. (Oops. I meant to type “climate change.” It’s not beneficial to use “global warming” anymore because the earth has experienced much warmer and much cooler periods in the past. So it’s easier to cover all the bases and just call the hoax “climate change.”)
July 11, 2008 at 4:42 pm
no, tsfiles, we will not come and play with you in your ghost town of a blog.
KEvron
July 11, 2008 at 5:55 pm
I checked it out. A complete dittohead. Not a single opinion or post out of variance in the slightest degree from exactly what you’d expect. Borrrrrring.