Shocking Drone Footage Shows Harvey's "Unprecedented" Devastation, "No Parallel To Any Rainstorm In US History"

Based on the number of people affected, amount of water involved, and other factors, meteorologists have warned, there may be no parallel available to any other rainstorm in U.S. history as Mashable's Andrew Freeman reports Tropical Storm Harvey has dropped more than 11 trillion gallons of water on Texas, triggering catastrophic, unprecedented flooding in the Houston area.

The rains have broken all-time records, exceeding the rainfall totals seen during Tropical Storm Allison in 2001... and it could be about to get a lot worse as forecasters are expecting the storm to turn back and drench what is left of Houston once again midweek.

According to Ryan Maue, a meteorologist at WeatherBell, a private forecasting firm, there is still up to 16 trillion gallons more rain likely to fall in the state, based on forecasts from the National Weather Service (NWS).


The Weather Service office in Houston reported just over 2 feet of rain in 24 hours between 7 a.m. Saturday and 7 a.m. Sunday morning, causing August to become the wettest month on record there. Forecast totals call for isolated rainfall amounts of up to 50 inches before Harvey finally releases its grip on the Lone Star state late this week. If this comes to fruition, it would be the greatest rainfall totals from a tropical storm or hurricane in U.S. history.


Maue estimates that a total of around 25 trillion gallons may be the final statewide rainfall total for Harvey, which is such a unique storm due to its slow-moving nature that the NWS has nearly run out of superlatives describing it.

Drone video shows the massive extent of the flooding...

Damage from Hurricane Harvey is expected to total tens of billions of dollars, with current estimates range from $20 billion to $40 billion, but an unusually large share of victims lacking adequate protection - only one in six have insurance.

Still a named storm over 48 hours after landfall, Harvey is the longest a Texas landfalling hurricane has remained a named storm after landfall since Fern in 1971, according to Colorado State University tropical scientist Dr. Phil Klotzbach.

Due to its wide geographic scope across America's 4th-largest city, the ensuing flood disaster may rank as one of the most, if not the most, expensive natural disaster in U.S. history.

According to a tweet the NWS sent,

"this event is unprecedented & all impacts are unknown & beyond anything experienced."

With more rain to come, and rivers still rising to expected record-shattering crests early this week, the disaster continues to unfold.

Here's what to expect...(via

A tropical cyclone's rainfall potential is a function of its forward speed, not its intensity. Therefore, several more days of torrential rain are expected in many of the already flood-ravaged areas.

  • Upper Texas coast into southwest Louisiana: an additional 15 to 25 inches, bringing isolated storm totals up to 50 inches over the upper Texas coast, including the Houston/Galveston metro areas
  • Farther south into the middle Texas coast, west toward the Texas Hill Country and east across south-central Louisiana: storm totals of 5 to 15 inches

The National Weather Service is forecasting major river flooding in roughly three-dozen locations in southeast Texas.


And worst of all, weather experts are forecasting a second landfall. Harvey is set to make a second landfall, maybe as a hurricane, between Galveston and Beamont/Port Arthur, WeatherBell says in emailed report.

"The path farther to the east gives this a chance to become a hurricane again, though modeling is not doing that"


Judging by the following drone footage, it's hard to imagine how this could get worse...

The director of the Federal Emergency Management Agency, Brock Long, predicted that the aftermath of the storm would require FEMA’s involvement for years. “This disaster’s going to be a landmark event,” Long said.


Creepy_Azz_Crackaah (not verified) BaBaBouy Mon, 08/28/2017 - 09:37 Permalink


2) Global Warming®'s (since rebranded Climate Change®, since rebranded CO2 Pollution®, since rebranded Climate Disruption®) FAULT!!!

3) Russia hacked the weather!!!

4) If we just paid a LOT more in taxes and allowed the gubmint MUCH more control over our lives the climate would stabilize and NOT change (no more Climate Change)!.

5) This is Nazi weather forced on minorities, children, women, and puppies becasue it is rayciss.

Pick and choose from any of the above and you'll be featured on ANY major "news" corporation's broadcast/paper/web site. "News!..."

In reply to by BaBaBouy

Slack Jack Creepy_Azz_Crackaah (not verified) Mon, 08/28/2017 - 09:48 Permalink

Speaking of flooding.....

So, why is the global rise in temperatures so worrisome?

For one thing, as temperatures rise good farmland will become desert (e.g., dust-bowl conditions will probably return to the American Midwest).

Another major problem is sea-level rise.

Have a look at

The U.S. Geological Survey people claim that;

The Greenland ice sheet melting will raise sea-level 6.55 meters (21.5 feet),
the West Antarctica ice sheet melting will raise sea-level 8.06 meters (26.4 feet),
the East Antarctica ice sheet melting will raise sea-level 64.8 meters (212.6 feet),
and all other ice melting will raise sea-level 0.91 meters (3 feet).

For a grand total of about 80 meters (263 feet).

So, what does an 80 meter (263 feet) rise in sea-level mean. Have a look at the following map of the world after an 80 meter rise. It means that over one billion people will have to be resettled to higher ground and that much of the most productive agricultural land will be under water. Fortunately, at current rates, the Greenland ice sheet will take over a thousand years to melt and the Antarctica ice sheet, much longer. However, the greater the temperature rise the faster the ice sheets will melt, bringing the problem much closer. Remember, the huge ice sheet that recently covered much of North America, almost completely melted in only 15,000 years (today, only the Greenland ice sheet, and some other small patches of it, remain). Since then (15,000 years ago), sea-levels have risen about 125 meters (410 feet), only 80 meters to go.

The ice sheets have been continuously melting for thousands of years. What is left of them today, is still melting, and will continue to melt. Human caused global warning will cause this remnant to melt significantly faster. This is a big, big, problem.

For HUGE detailed maps of the "World after the Melt" go to:

Global temperatures are increasing. And by quite a lot each year.

2016 is the hottest year on record for global temperatures.

This is 0.0380 degrees centigrade hotter than the previous record year which was 2015.

0.0380 is a large increase in just one year.

2015 was the hottest year (at that time) for global temperatures.

This was 0.1601 degrees hotter than the previous record year which was 2014.

0.1601 is an absolutely huge increase in just one year (at this rate temperatures would increase by 16 degrees in a century).

2014 was the hottest year (at that time) for global temperatures.

This was 0.0402 degrees hotter than the previous record year which was 2010.

The conspiracy to hide global warming data.

The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) is given tax money to make global temperature records available to the public. However, certain people at NOAA continually sabotage this aspect of NOAA's mandate. For example, these people have (deliberately) sabotaged the web-page that delivers the temperature records.

Look for yourself:

Go to the page: scroll down to the The Global Anomalies and Index Data section and click the download button and see what happens. Well, you get the message:

"Not Found. The requested URL /monitoring-references/faq/anomalies-download was not found on this server."

I guess that the 2017 data must be truly horrible if they have to hide it away.

It turns out that this seems to be the case; NASA reports that:

July 2017 had the hottest average land temperatures on record.

The new July 2017 record was +1.20 degrees centigrade above the 20th century average (of the July data). The previous record average land temperature for July was just last year. It was +1.10 degrees above the 20th century average.

Did the media bother to tell you about this? No!

In reply to by Creepy_Azz_Crackaah (not verified)

HungryPorkChop Oh regional Indian Mon, 08/28/2017 - 11:07 Permalink

The next problem is food and clean drinking water..  Major highways are closed, flooding continues, millions and millions of people stuck in their homes sheltering in place.  Hot and humid August Texas summer days and many have no electricity.  This is the makings of a Greek Tragedy of epic porportions!I've never seen a hurricane that went from a CAT 1 to CAT 4 like this then seeming stalled once it hit land.  Then does a 180 turn and goes back over the same areas again dumping this much rain. 

In reply to by Oh regional Indian

The Cooler King (not verified) HungryPorkChop Mon, 08/28/2017 - 13:20 Permalink

Um... clean drinking water... I'm not trying to be a dick here, but the rainfall total is said to be up to 50 inches. - a 5 gallon paint bucket from Home Depot is 12" high- so, without even any other (2D area) help, (like a rooftop, or a tarp, which costs 4 bucks), you could collect 20 gallons with 4 buckets. FFS ~ at my house I have a dozen 55 gallon barrels and about a half dozen 96 gallon trash cans, not to mention a 220 gallon water container and about 100 of these 5 gallon bucksts that I used for other storage, but could be repurposed, &, ffs, if you're not even using them, are stackable & take up vey little space... I use these collection containers to water my garden and plants during dry periods... Forget about the paint buckets, the barrels & other containers are all daisy chained together and sourced from my downspouts... which makes for around 1,400 gallons of storage... Even with a quick thunderstorm of less than an inch of rain, I'm usually topped off within about 15 minutes. OK, so again, I'm not trying to be a dick, but with just a tiny bit of planning (say, having 5 + 5 gallon paint buckets and a 4 dollar tarp), you'd have more than 20 gallons of fresh water... That is, unless, of course, you listened to Gartman...

In reply to by HungryPorkChop

The Cooler King (not verified) Bigly Mon, 08/28/2017 - 13:35 Permalink

Chrissakes, I do the above & I don't even live in a hurricane zone. 5 x 5 gallon paint buckets x $2.97 = $15 bucks6' x 10' tarp ($7 for the expensive ones, $5 for the cheap ones which do fine duty if all u need is rain collection & they can be STORED in the buckets) $20 bucks CHEETOS ~ 4 x 17.5 oz bags (which you could scarf down watching the Blacula, 50 Shades of Black, The Wiz, movie marathon, & then they're GONE!) = $20 "Lakes are + 6ft high." Well, the CATFISH ought 2 be jumpin'

In reply to by Bigly

looseal The Cooler King (not verified) Mon, 08/28/2017 - 18:18 Permalink

Thanks for the instructions CK.  I'm new to Florida from rural N.Y. where I had access to a well.  I am in the process of making myself hurricane SHTF self sufficient.  Your instructions will be used.  I did read that rain water is portable unless it runs off of a roof due to roofing material contamination. But it's good for doing laundry, toilet flushing and plant watering.  

In reply to by The Cooler King (not verified)

lew1024 Oh regional Indian Mon, 08/28/2017 - 11:49 Permalink

I don't think so. Weather and climate are chaotic systems, both with inputs from the sun and space.We don't have the technology to control chaotic systems, open, evolving, complex systems with chaotic elements.I don't even know of solid evidence that cloud seeding reliably produces rain, producing a hurricane is a few orders of magnitude beyond that.I should not have an opinion on this, however, as I have not studied cloud seeding, casual reading over years. But my opinion on chaotic systems is solid, I know that work, and I know of no reason to believe that model does not control any attempts at weather control.

In reply to by Oh regional Indian

BeansMcGreens Oh regional Indian Mon, 08/28/2017 - 13:20 Permalink

No, it is the stupidity of building a  large city on a bayou on the Gulf of Mexico of all places. All that cement, just look at the pictures of the interstates running like rivers, which they became. One inch of rain falling on one acre of ground is equal to about 27,154 gallons and weighs about 113 tons, go figure how many acres those highways cover. This is a man-made disaster by pure ignorance, then throw in a democrat homosexual black mayor and thousands of illegals living off welfare who now have nothing to go back to, whew satan must be laughing like hell.

In reply to by Oh regional Indian

Justin Case Slack Jack Mon, 08/28/2017 - 14:15 Permalink

Must be square head orgin. Climatologist Cliff Harris and Meteorologist Randy Mann, believe in rather frequent climate changes in our global weather patterns. Geologic evidence shows our climate has been changing over millions of years. The warming and cooling of global temperatures are likely the result of long-term climatic cycles, solar activity, sea-surface temperature patterns and more. However, Mankind’s activities of the burning of fossil fuels, massive deforestations, the replacing of grassy surfaces with asphalt and concrete, the “Urban Heat Island Effect,” are likely creating more harmful pollution. Yes, we believe we should be “going green” whenever and wherever possible.Based on current data, this new warmer cycle could produce even hotter and drier weather patterns than we saw during the late 1990s and early 2000s. We also believe that our prolonged cycle of wide weather “extremes,” the worst in at least 1,000 years, will continue and perhaps become more severe in the years to come.We should remember, that the Earth’s coldest periods have usually followed excessive warmth. Such was the case when our planet moved from the Medieval Warm Period between 900 and 1300 A.D. to the sudden “Little Ice Age,” which peaked in the 17th Century. Since 2,500 B.C., there have been at least 78 major climate changes worldwide, including two major changes in just the past 40 years. In terms of upcoming cooling and warming periods, only time will tell.

In reply to by Slack Jack

Give Me Some Truth BigJim Mon, 08/28/2017 - 11:00 Permalink

It's NOT a once-in-500-year event. It might be a once-in-100 year event.I was watching storm coverage Saturday. The reporter interviewed the owner of a tavern (I think in Galveston or Corpus Christi, not sure). His tavern had yet to receive any flooding (probably has by now). In the interview the man showed the reporter a bronze placcard on a wood-beam column in his establishment. The plaque showed the high point of where water levels reached in a 1916 storm. The plaque was 8-feet-high! He couldn't reach it.Anyway, it's an epic flood, but apparently this city HAS seen higher water levels than Harvey, and the previous storm storm occured pre-Climate Change.

In reply to by BigJim

Justin Case Utopia Planitia Mon, 08/28/2017 - 14:29 Permalink

Welcome to labor saving technology. If you don't like paste, use voice software to type for ya. Be technically smart, use the modern technology at yoar finger tips. Maybe he should send you a letter instead? Remember the typewriter? Ya, we've moved on. The keyboard is the electronic typewriter today. Getting the message across is the primary objective, not method of delivery.

In reply to by Utopia Planitia

Dolar in a vortex Creepy_Azz_Crackaah (not verified) Mon, 08/28/2017 - 11:38 Permalink interesting information on the source of the moisture that feeds this storm.When the storm made landfall, the tv was wailing about 140mph winds and yet on the NWS website, those winds were represented numerically and graphically as not exceeding 85mph.  A friend independently noticed the same thing as he checked wind speeds around the airports being impacted.How does that happen?

In reply to by Creepy_Azz_Crackaah (not verified)

Give Me Some Truth Dolar in a vortex Mon, 08/28/2017 - 13:55 Permalink

Re: Wind speedsDrudge posted a link to the actual top "wind gusts."There was one "gust" that reached 132 mph in one city. Two or three other cities also had "gusts" over 100 mph. After these towns one town recorded a "gust" of 90 mph. All the other top gusts from scores of cities in Texas were around 50 to 65 mph - not even hurricane force.And these were recorded as gusts not sustained winds. This is/was a rain event, not a wind event.P.S. I live in central Alabama, 2 1/2 hours north of the panhandle of Florida. When Hurricane Opal hit our town about 15 years ago, we had winds higher than 95 percent of the towns in Texas from Harvey. Every house in our town pretty much had trees down.We didn't have 50 inches of rain though.

In reply to by Dolar in a vortex

eclectic syncretist Slack Jack Mon, 08/28/2017 - 10:03 Permalink

Can you prove the general trend towards warming is being caused by people? No! And even if you could, would people stop burning fossil fuels???? No! Get a solution or get lost.Anyway, the more immediate point is that the MSM like CNN doesn't give a damn about people dying and losing their life's work in this humanitarian disaster that is unfolding in Texas, because they are too busy hating on President Trump to worry about the real new's obligation to help people with timely information during emergencies. They were actually bitching about president Trump even during the exact time that Harvey was making landfall, rather than trying to help people!!!

In reply to by Slack Jack

Slack Jack eclectic syncretist Mon, 08/28/2017 - 11:12 Permalink

eclectic syncretist @Aug 28, 2017 10:03 AM "Can you prove the general trend towards warming is being caused by people?"

Basically, the situation is as follows:

The sun mainly emits visible light.

The atmosphere is transparent to visible light so the visible light from the sun passes through the atmosphere and is absorbed by the surface (ground or ocean).

The surface becomes hot, and like all hot things, it emits heat (infrared light). Some of this infrared light heads in the direction of space. Whether it leaves the planet, or not, depends on how transparent the atmosphere is to infrared light.

Now some gases in the atmosphere are NOT transparent to infrared light.

Infrared light comes in lots of different wavelengths (visible light also comes in lots of different wavelengths: violet, blue, green, yellow, red, etc). The collection of all these wavelengths is called the infrared spectrum.

Water vapor absorbs strongly in large parts of the infrared spectrum and only allows infrared to pass through in certain sections of the spectrum (called windows). The large quantity of water vapor in the atmosphere means that water vapor stops a large amount of the heat escaping to space. This heat is re-radiated in all directions so some of it heads back to the ground. This extra heat makes the environment warmer (the greenhouse effect).

This is good. Without the greenhouse effect due to water vapor, the Earth would be frozen solid.

Carbon dioxide is also a powerful greenhouse gas. Unfortunately, it happens to absorb quite strongly in the main windows where the water vapor doesn't. Thus the CO2 reflects back heat that would have otherwise escaped to space, making the Earth a little warmer. The more CO2 in the atmosphere the more these windows are blocked and the warmer it gets.

The warmer the CO2 makes the Earth the more water vapor enters the air. Thus the CO2 and extra water vapor (due to the extra CO2) both contribute to the greenhouse effect.

Although greenhouse warming is great there comes a point when it is a bad thing. We are at that point.

It is completely clear that mankind is increasing the amount CO2 in the atmosphere and it is becoming clear that the mechanism that I just outlined is happening and the planet is heating.

In reply to by eclectic syncretist