Global Warming? Any info welcomed!

Priest

Commodore of Impending Doom II
Snatched from the tabloid, The Guardian (UK) about climate changes

Now the Pentagon tells Bush: climate change will destroy us

· Secret report warns of rioting and nuclear war
· Britain will be 'Siberian' in less than 20 years
· Threat to the world is greater than terrorism

Mark Townsend and Paul Harris in New York
Sunday February 22, 2004
The Observer

Climate change over the next 20 years could result in a global catastrophe costing millions of lives in wars and natural disasters..

A secret report, suppressed by US defence chiefs and obtained by The Observer, warns that major European cities will be sunk beneath rising seas as Britain is plunged into a 'Siberian' climate by 2020. Nuclear conflict, mega-droughts, famine and widespread rioting will erupt across the world.

The document predicts that abrupt climate change could bring the planet to the edge of anarchy as countries develop a nuclear threat to defend and secure dwindling food, water and energy supplies. The threat to global stability vastly eclipses that of terrorism, say the few experts privy to its contents.

'Disruption and conflict will be endemic features of life,' concludes the Pentagon analysis. 'Once again, warfare would define human life.'

The findings will prove humiliating to the Bush administration, which has repeatedly denied that climate change even exists. Experts said that they will also make unsettling reading for a President who has insisted national defence is a priority.

The report was commissioned by influential Pentagon defence adviser Andrew Marshall, who has held considerable sway on US military thinking over the past three decades. He was the man behind a sweeping recent review aimed at transforming the American military under Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld.

Climate change 'should be elevated beyond a scientific debate to a US national security concern', say the authors, Peter Schwartz, CIA consultant and former head of planning at Royal Dutch/Shell Group, and Doug Randall of the California-based Global Business Network.

An imminent scenario of catastrophic climate change is 'plausible and would challenge United States national security in ways that should be considered immediately', they conclude. As early as next year widespread flooding by a rise in sea levels will create major upheaval for millions.

Last week the Bush administration came under heavy fire from a large body of respected scientists who claimed that it cherry- picked science to suit its policy agenda and suppressed studies that it did not like. Jeremy Symons, a former whistleblower at the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), said that suppression of the report for four months was a further example of the White House trying to bury the threat of climate change.

Senior climatologists, however, believe that their verdicts could prove the catalyst in forcing Bush to accept climate change as a real and happening phenomenon. They also hope it will convince the United States to sign up to global treaties to reduce the rate of climatic change.

A group of eminent UK scientists recently visited the White House to voice their fears over global warming, part of an intensifying drive to get the US to treat the issue seriously. Sources have told The Observer that American officials appeared extremely sensitive about the issue when faced with complaints that America's public stance appeared increasingly out of touch.

One even alleged that the White House had written to complain about some of the comments attributed to Professor Sir David King, Tony Blair's chief scientific adviser, after he branded the President's position on the issue as indefensible.

Among those scientists present at the White House talks were Professor John Schellnhuber, former chief environmental adviser to the German government and head of the UK's leading group of climate scientists at the Tyndall Centre for Climate Change Research. He said that the Pentagon's internal fears should prove the 'tipping point' in persuading Bush to accept climatic change.

Sir John Houghton, former chief executive of the Meteorological Office - and the first senior figure to liken the threat of climate change to that of terrorism - said: 'If the Pentagon is sending out that sort of message, then this is an important document indeed.'

Bob Watson, chief scientist for the World Bank and former chair of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, added that the Pentagon's dire warnings could no longer be ignored.

'Can Bush ignore the Pentagon? It's going be hard to blow off this sort of document. Its hugely embarrassing. After all, Bush's single highest priority is national defence. The Pentagon is no wacko, liberal group, generally speaking it is conservative. If climate change is a threat to national security and the economy, then he has to act. There are two groups the Bush Administration tend to listen to, the oil lobby and the Pentagon,' added Watson.

'You've got a President who says global warming is a hoax, and across the Potomac river you've got a Pentagon preparing for climate wars. It's pretty scary when Bush starts to ignore his own government on this issue,' said Rob Gueterbock of Greenpeace.

Already, according to Randall and Schwartz, the planet is carrying a higher population than it can sustain. By 2020 'catastrophic' shortages of water and energy supply will become increasingly harder to overcome, plunging the planet into war. They warn that 8,200 years ago climatic conditions brought widespread crop failure, famine, disease and mass migration of populations that could soon be repeated.

Randall told The Observer that the potential ramifications of rapid climate change would create global chaos. 'This is depressing stuff,' he said. 'It is a national security threat that is unique because there is no enemy to point your guns at and we have no control over the threat.'

Randall added that it was already possibly too late to prevent a disaster happening. 'We don't know exactly where we are in the process. It could start tomorrow and we would not know for another five years,' he said.

'The consequences for some nations of the climate change are unbelievable. It seems obvious that cutting the use of fossil fuels would be worthwhile.'

So dramatic are the report's scenarios, Watson said, that they may prove vital in the US elections. Democratic frontrunner John Kerry is known to accept climate change as a real problem. Scientists disillusioned with Bush's stance are threatening to make sure Kerry uses the Pentagon report in his campaign.

The fact that Marshall is behind its scathing findings will aid Kerry's cause. Marshall, 82, is a Pentagon legend who heads a secretive think-tank dedicated to weighing risks to national security called the Office of Net Assessment. Dubbed 'Yoda' by Pentagon insiders who respect his vast experience, he is credited with being behind the Department of Defence's push on ballistic-missile defence.

Symons, who left the EPA in protest at political interference, said that the suppression of the report was a further instance of the White House trying to bury evidence of climate change. 'It is yet another example of why this government should stop burying its head in the sand on this issue.'

Symons said the Bush administration's close links to high- powered energy and oil companies was vital in understanding why climate change was received sceptically in the Oval Office. 'This administration is ignoring the evidence in order to placate a handful of large energy and oil companies,' he added.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Priest

Commodore of Impending Doom II
Re: End of the world or something...

More sources about the report are at Yahoo news...
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Krummhorn

Administrator
Staff member
ADMINISTRATOR
This being a relevant topic of increasing interest, I think this deserves more discussion. What is happening in your part of the world? What is being done?
 

Sybarite

New member
Hi Priest – just briefly to say that the Guardian isn't a tabloid – actually it's Berliner format these days, but still counts as a broadsheet in terms of being a 'quality' paper rather than being a tabloid, which literally is a measurement of size but, in the UK at least, is used as shorthand for a newspaper that isn't very serious or of any great intellectual merit – a newspaper that plays to the masses.

Anyway, it seems as though Mr Bush isn't interested in what he's been told by the Pentagon in 2004 or even by countless scientists: the US is objecting to G8 attempts to deal with global warming and climate change.

Perhaps the administration simply believes that the End Times are coming soon and they don't need to worry?
 

Krummhorn

Administrator
Staff member
ADMINISTRATOR
Oh gosh, I hope the "end" isn't near ... I still owe money on my car loan :grin:

Seriously, it seems that the present US administration, now being in its last year of 'control' (aka: lame duck year) maybe doesn't want to make too many waves, hoping not to upset the applecart for the Republican party?

I would like to think this is not so ... the US needs to take a real proactive part in this matter ... we can't simply sit back and do nothing. :shake: :crazy:
 

zlya

New member
I remember a government class in high school (in America). The teacher asked us what was wrong with the government. Needless to say, we were able to go on for quite some time. Then he asked what we had done about it. He asked how many of us had written letters or signed petitions or done anything whatsoever to influence our government. Dead silence.

Get the point? We can't sit back and do nothing, so don't. We can write letters, sign petitions, vote. These people want to get reelected, so they want to do what their constituents like. We, the constituents, need to tell them what we like in no uncertain terms.
 

Krummhorn

Administrator
Staff member
ADMINISTRATOR
This is a good point, Zlya ...

I am one of those who does write to my Congressman, Senators, and other leaders in the US. Although I get nice flowery replies (mostly from a automatic bot) little is done, if anything, mainly because there aren't enough voices willing to voice their opinions to these elected leaders.

I, for one, will continue to bend their ears - - - with everyone doing this, we can, collectively, make a difference.
 

toejamfootball

New member
The problem is, in order to be a big time elected leader.. (Senator, Congressman, President) you need to be Rich. So you can vote for a rich Democrat or a rich Republican.. why would either of them care (seriously care) about the Majority of Americans. They dont even live in the same world.

Seems to me like Politics is all a big game for them. They are more interested in winning for their respective parties that they dont think about the real issues seriously. So it ends up being a bunch of rich Dems fighting rich Republicans about issues that effect the Majority of the Country which they really know nothing about.
 

Corno Dolce

Admiral Honkenwheezenpooferspieler
Last edited:

Sybarite

New member
It's hardly as though the theory of human causes in global warming is limited to Al Gore, though – or just one or two scientists.
 

Corno Dolce

Admiral Honkenwheezenpooferspieler
Funny thing about AlGore is that his household consumes more energy than 20 normal American households - and he gets a Nobel Prize for Environmental Awareness??? Something really fishy is going on here. :grin::grin::grin::grin::grin::grin::grin:
 

pnoom

New member
Dr. William Gray, a leading Meteorologist, has recently given a lecture at UNC-Charlotte where he disproves the current error about humans causing global warming. Herein is a link for to read and contemplate:

I don't think that's the word you want. While I'm not sure Gore deserved the prize, the evidence both for and against human-caused global warming is far too strong to be "proved" either way.
 

methodistgirl

New member
Yes I agree! But look at what the last generations have left us after
WW2 to this war in Iraq not to mention Nasa's programs! Something is
messing up our climate. Kentucky has suffered the biggest drought in
my lifetime. It never rained since last spring until now. Like I said last
summer. It was so hot even kentucky's own weeds couldn't take it.
The heatwave had us in the 104+ range. Last winter was just as big
of a duzy. The temperature is normaly for the lowest during the day
is 30. It got down to below 3 degrees and pipes busted everywhere
and froze. Madisonville had a mess when it warmed up!:eek: Heating
bills were rediculous. Now water is so scarce here in the south that
officials are tightening up on water rules.
judy tooley
 

pnoom

New member
Speaking of Nasa's programs, did you know they're now working on seeing how drugs (like LSD, speed, cocaine, etc) effect spiders' web-making abilities.
 

methodistgirl

New member
Pnoom that's the most rediclous thing I ever heard.:rolleyes: Nasa doing that
to spiders. That goes to show you where your hard earned tax money
goes to!:rolleyes: America needs to get a grip on this unnesesary spending!:grin:
Blow money on something that stupid. Anyone can do that without
spending tax money! Why not feed people who are hungry with that
money! Gees!:rolleyes: Or spend it on fixing this problem with pollution and
crazy weather we're getting. What does everyone else think?
judy tooley
 

Corno Dolce

Admiral Honkenwheezenpooferspieler
Hi Judy,

Those LSD induced spiders is what is popularly called pork-barrel spending and it can be severly delimited if the voting constituency got off their duff and exercised their right to the holding of their representative's feet to the fire. Email, write letters, phone, fax, yea - use every and any means of communication to notify your representative that you disapprove of the pork. Let him/her know that their tenure in elected office hangs by a sheer thread. Get the troops out and picket the reps office.

Cheers,

Corno Dolce
 

Krummhorn

Administrator
Staff member
ADMINISTRATOR
Pnoom that's the most rediclous thing I ever heard.:rolleyes: Nasa doing that
to spiders. That goes to show you where your hard earned tax money
goes to!:rolleyes: America needs to get a grip on this unnesesary spending!:grin:
Blow money on something that stupid. Anyone can do that without
spending tax money! Why not feed people who are hungry with that
money! Gees!:rolleyes: Or spend it on fixing this problem with pollution and
crazy weather we're getting. What does everyone else think?
judy tooley

Oh, I could relate more on this ... I worked for a government contractor - the costs of hammers ($250) and screwdrivers ($75 each) the government paid for the contractor to purchase. We had 3 PC's in my area for testing work - the company (government) paid $160,000 EACH for these horridly inadequate machines. You and I could have bought the same machine everyday and twice on Tuesday for about $1,500 including the software. To make matters worse, the 'POS' PC's they bought continually broke down which required an outside vendor to come in and make the repairs at about $35,000 for each service call. Yes, it is true - there is lots of government waste in spending for frivolous things ... It has been able to run rampant for so many years, it will be next to impossible to stop now.

I remember the many times that we had to scrimp and reuse printer paper - turning it over and feeding it back through again because we couldn't 'afford it' to purchase new boxes of paper ... we coined the phrase "catch the pennies as the dollars fly by" which stuck over the years - management would frown at us everytime we mentioned that.

I took early retirement from that place after nearly 25 years. Now that same company pays me to stay home, compose music, moderate two music forums, supervise an online wiki project, and generally enjoy life.
 

methodistgirl

New member
I can't agree more Corno Dolce and Krummhorn! Why can't the government
take the same money and help those hurricane and tornado victoms of
two years ago. Sections of my town is still destroyed from the tornado
on Nov,15,05. Some of south Madisonville is still a mess! Those who
still show pictures of the gulf coast looks like a war zone worse than even
Baghdad. I can understand Baghdad being tore up because of the war.
Here, the government sits on their kuesters and spend money on things
that are unnesessary.:rolleyes: Well, that's my opinion.
judy tooley
 
Top