In Germany and a number of other countries there was a real disaster, hundreds of people died, huge damage was done to the infrastructure of cities and property of citizens, but judging by what is written in the German and European press, the authorities use this tragedy to scare the population with “Global Warming”, while the tragedy could have been avoided, but it was not done. This begs the question – was it intentional or gross negligence?
The authorities left the dams full to the brim for at least 3 weeks during the rainy period and then failed to undertake a controlled release of water, even when 150 mm of rain was predicted 4 days before the flood.
Now do they want to cover up their blatant incompetence and blame it on climate change or was it done on purpose? The “glitch” in the SMS alert that made people not even know that deadly torrents of water were coming at them also looks very strange.
The flood catastrophe in Germany could have been largely prevented, especially in terms of the death toll. According to the latest figures, 202 people have died, more than 700 have been injured and 1,300 are still missing in Europe due to the floods. The floods have become the largest in 60 years in Germany. The local media is already calling it the “flood of the century. In many places there is still no electricity, no drinking water, no cell phone service and destroyed roads.
But, what conclusions do the authorities and, most importantly, the mainstream media draw from what happened? “Environmentalists believe that these downpours are the result of climate change caused by global warming due to greenhouse gas emissions. This means that such devastating floods will occur more and more often.
People are frightened and now they may well agree with the threat of the propagated “global warming” and it will be easier for the EU authorities to introduce all the crazy measures they plan to introduce – abandoning fossil fuels, gasoline engines, oil, coal and gas and all this in anticipation of the soon to be Ice Age!
Although heavy rains were predicted days before the flood, nothing was done to prevent the inevitable devastation. Instead of taking responsibility, politicians blame climate change, trying to deflect attention away from their incompetence and gross negligence, or perhaps malice.
Dams built to regulate the flow of mountain streams and rivers remained overflowing for weeks before the disaster occurred – despite the fact that it was rainy season in Europe. No controlled release was made to increase the volume of the dam, even though all the reservoirs were already overflowing!
One freelance journalist, Henning Rosenbusch, posted a video on Twitter in which a German resident makes a comment to a Welt reporter:
A resident of the flooded region tells the Welt reporter how he rides his mountain bike every week along the levees holding back water in the valleys. “I’ve noticed that in the last 3 weeks all the dams have been filled to the top – only 20-30 cm from the edge. These dams exist to hold back water. Why didn’t they release some of the water in a controlled manner much earlier? To me, it’s unimaginable. It shouldn’t have happened if there was 10 or 20 percent more free volume in the dams.”
The reporter replied, “That’s a criticism I’ve heard over and over again today.
Anwohner: “Mir ist aufgefallen, dass seit mind. 3 Wochen alle Talsperren voll bis oben hin waren und nicht kontrolliert abgelassen wurden.” pic.twitter.com/U4pc2HA1sg
— henning rosenbusch (@rosenbusch_) July 18, 2021
For three weeks the dams remained filled to the top, even when long-term forecasts (14 days) indicated that more and more rain would fall. It had been a rainy summer, and there was no sign that things were about to change.
Then 4 days before the disaster, meteorologists warned that up to 150 mm of rain was expected in the near future, but there was no response to this information and there was no controlled release of water from the overflowing reservoirs!
The filled dams were time bombs that needed to be deactivated – and there was an opportunity to do so. But for some reason, the authorities did nothing to release water behind the dams in a controlled manner to create capacity and slow the flow downstream.
One has to understand what Europe is planning to do and why the myth of global warming is so important to it. Much is at stake, including the well-being of its citizens, who opposed these innovations affecting the well-being of every citizen, but now, through disaster and loss of life, the position of the frightened citizens of the European Union may be very different.
Europe was the first in the world to outline a plan to combat climate change. The EU was the first in the world to dare to move from promises to action and to legislate a path to a green future. When gasoline-powered cars will be banned, how much more coal can be burned and how many forests must be planted – all this will be inscribed in the EU’s tablets and will be enforceable.
“An economy built on minerals is exhausted. We want to leave the next generation a habitable planet,” said Ursula von der Leyen, head of the European Commission. – “Europe was the first continent to declare carbon neutralization by 2050, and now we are the first to present a concrete plan to achieve this goal.
In order to do so, we will have to radically change our way of life. And this is what the European officials propose.
The boldest proposal in the package is a de facto ban on the sale of cars with petrol and diesel engines from 2035. To encourage people to buy electric cars, the European Commission proposes to oblige all 27 countries of the block to create a network of gas stations similar to today’s fossil fuels – no more than 60 km between outlets. Any battery can be used to cover that distance.
Transport and ground transportation is a key source of emissions, and it has long been converted to green rails. But now the EU has gone further and is going to oblige those who have so far refused to do so, citing a lack of electric alternatives. First of all, aviation and shipping.
Electric-passenger airliners and electric cargo ships are still hiding in the slates of daring inventors, and the EU wants to spur commercial developments with taxes and emissions charges. So far, airlines and sea carriers have been exempt – only the most avid smokers, like factories and power generators, have paid.
Now everyone else, including builders, carriers, and even owners of heated business centers, will have to buy emission quotas.
This means extra costs, higher costs, and loss of competitiveness, since no new rules and payments are foreseen abroad because of global warming. In order not to kill its own business, the EU decided to protect it with a special carbon duty on all imports from countries with lower standards.
Discussions about such a duty have been going on for a long time, to the dismay of trading partners that supply energy-intensive products to Europe, primarily Russia, Ukraine, India, and China.
And the European Commission has dealt a double blow to the airlines. In addition to the emission quotas, they will have to pay a tax on jet fuel.
The projects were discussed with lobbyists, businessmen, politicians of all the 27 EU countries and ecologists. Now they have been put up for public discussion, and each of the nearly half a billion EU residents will be able to give their opinion, but most EU citizens doubt that their main problem is the climate and not poverty, unemployment, migration, inequality, health care, pensions and so on. The population and businesses are unhappy that they will have to pay for it, and the money is already gone because of the pandemic and the crisis.
“All of this is going to be very difficult,” admitted Franz Timmermans, vice president of the European Commission. – It’s going to be wildly difficult. I have no illusions about it.
Now it’s going to be very simple… Very simple, Mr. Franz Timmermans.