CBS News: "Rural Afghanistan has been rocked by climate change. The past three decades have brought floods and drought that have destroyed crops and left people hungry. And the Taliban — likely without knowing climate change was the cause — has taken advantage of that pain." ... "The Taliban has capitalized on the agricultural stress and distrust in government to recruit supporters. Alam said the group has the means to pay fighters more, $5-$10 per day, than what they can make farming." ..."With poverty and war and everything else, climate change is the last thing on anyone's mind," said Alam.
"Climate change has fueled terrorism and civil unrest elsewhere in the world. Boko Haram gripped water-scarce central Africa in 2017 as they gained footholds along the Lake Chad Basin. ISIS has taken advantage of agrarian communities suffering from extreme drought in Iraq and Syria."
Reality Check: Greenpeace Co-Founder Dr. Patrick Moore rips CBS News, tells Climate Depot: "It’s like there is a contest to invent the most implausible fabrication about the climate. At a certain point, it becomes too silly to even bother trying to counter it with reason. Could that be their ambition, to get away with being uncontested?"
James Taylor refutes CBS News with crop yield data: "As you can see, however, Afghanistan has fully doubled its crop yields during the past three decades. Also, Afghan farmers have set new production records on a regular basis, especially during the past few years. ... If global warming has had any impact on Afghan farmer sentiment throughout the country, it has clearly been to make farmers happier, more prosperous, and less vulnerable to the Taliban."
Dr. Roger Pielke Jr.: "At some point, the IPCC went down the path of favoring extreme scenarios. Not extreme climate scenarios, but extreme societal scenarios. Imagine a future, for example, where the only energy source we rely on is coal. We get rid of solar, wind, nuclear and natural gas. That’s pretty extreme. And it’s pretty out of line with where the world actually is now and where it’s headed. But still, this scenario is then fed into the climate models that produce projections of future impacts. There’s a ‘catastrophe bias’ baked into the IPCC. The IPCC has recognized this problem, finally, in its new report. But it hasn’t corrected it, which is unfortunate. The dynamic of the IPPC favoring the extreme scenario has been overlaid with the media, which takes an ‘if it bleeds, it leads’ approach to discussing the climate. It has also been overlaid with climate politics, which favors the extremes, too."
"Floods are not more frequent. Hurricanes and tropical cyclones are not more frequent. Meteorological and hydrological droughts are not more frequent. Tornadoes are not more frequent. Hail is not more frequent. Lightning is not more frequent. Strong winds are not more frequent. Heatwaves are more frequent, as is extreme precipitation (though the IPCC is very explicit that extreme precipitation is not to be conflated with flooding)."
Extreme weather expert Dr. Roger Pielke Jr.: "I can’t get over how egregiously wrong this NYT article is. Vulnerability to weather extremes is currently lower than it has ever been - in rich and poor countries — ever! This is one of the most significant science, technology & policy success stories of the past century. The idea that 'no one is safe' (NYT) Is as much misinformation as anti-vaccine propaganda. People around the world have never in all of history been more safe in the face of weather and climate extremes."
Bjorn Lomborg: "Hurricanes in 2021 were unprecedented — as in unprecedentedly few. Globally, 2021 had the fewest hurricanes ever in the satellite era (1980-2021). Globally, 2021 had some of the fewest strong hurricanes in the satellite era (1980-2021). With 16 strong (Cat 3+) hurricanes, 2021 was the second-lowest strong hurricane year since 1980. Globally, 2021 was a weak hurricane year. When measured by total energy (Accumulated Cyclone Energy), 2021 was the 9th weakest year. Did you see that reported anywhere?
Hurricanes in 2021 were weak and exceptionally few. But we heard lots about North Atlantic hurricanes. Conveniently, North Atlantic is the only basin where hurricanes are stronger. Does this leave us well-informed?. But we hear lots about names storms (hurricanes + weaker storms). Ever-easier to detect, so numbers keep climbing (4 of 2020s 30 named storms wouldn't have been named in 2000!). Not as relevant, but hey, scary numbers."