Dooms Day?? Pentagon tells Bush: climate change will destroy us (Europe )

[rodbarnett]

· 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

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.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/climatechange/story/0,12374,1153530,00.html

[Nederland]

1. UN says different

The UN IPCC report doesn't paint such a bleak picture. Is climate change occurring? Of course it is. But if we quote reports like this as being factual we run the risk of looking like fools. My guess is that this report was delibrately cooked up by Rove...

[silverlib]

2. Can you provide a link?

I'm taking the Guardian article to my Peace and Justice meeting tonight and would like to provide as much information as possible. The Guardian article is very disturbing. HAS the Pentagon accepted this information as worthy of further study?

Thanks!

[Nederland]

4. Sure

The main link to all the IPCC reports are here: http://www.ipcc.ch

The report that I was referring to is this one: http://www.ipcc.ch/pub/wg3spm.pdf

Here's a quote from it:

"At least up to 2020, energy supply and conversion will remain dominated by relatively cheap and abundant fossil fuels."

Most of the really detrimental effects of global warming will not be felt for another fifty to one hundred years. The idea that we will see catastrophic effects in the next 15 years is simply not true. I seriously believe this is merely an effort to discredit the entire field of climate change. On has to question the wisdom of believing the Pentagon over the UN in this case.

[silverlib]

5. Thanks...

Gives me something to balance the other article.

[myccrider]

8. Atlantic ocean conveyor

AIUI, if the 'conveyor' current in the Atlantic ocean shuts down, there is credible evidence that the climate will change much more rapidly that 50-100 years (10-20 years instead) and will change as described in the article. There is growing evidence that the 'conveyor' is weakening due to melting of northern ice, mostly the Arctic ice fields.

It *IS* somewhat speculative, but still a real possibility.

As to why the Pentagon report was 'leaked' (or released or whatever) - that could have nefarious repug undertones or there could be one or more people in the Pentagon who thought the information was important to get out to the public. The Pentagon isn't a completely monolithic bloc of Republican thought. And even some Republicans recognize that global warming is a real danger - whether its strongest effects are felt in 10 years or in 100 years.

Here's link to results of a google search on "ocean conveyor" + environmental & restricting the sites to .edu. There's plenty of scientific discussion/speculation about this phenomenon.(Not sure if the actual search will come up with this link, but you can do your own search with the info.)

http://tinyurl.com/2tbqo

[physaf]

9. Thanks for the link

.

[texastoast]

16. Possibly, however . . .

I recall a Nobel Prize being passed out to global climate change scientists in the mid-1990s. When Tom Dildo DeLay was asked about it, he said the scientists were fools. The scientists responded (to the effect), "It is apparent Mr. DeLay is simply ignorant."

With the icecaps melting at 10% more each year than the previous, well, won't it be a bit late to fix 20 years from now?

Alaska's average temperature has risen 5 degrees in the last I think it was 20 years (might have been 50). That's a freaking lot. And with deforestation taking away the natural carbon "sinks" . . .

http://magma.nationalgeographic.com/ngm/0402/feature5/

[Az]

3. The frightening thing

If * is a real fundie instead of just for votes then he looks forward to the end of the world. All that need happen is for someone to convince Shrubco that the destruction associated with Global Warming is simply a sign of the end times. How fast do you think a the end is nigh zealot would run towards such news?

[PaDUer]

6. Send a few cases of beer or whatever

he drinks and let him have a ball..he'd say the hell with this fundie shit!

[Viking12]

7. Keep in mind

As others have pointed out, the Pentagon analysis is a "what if" case scenario, not an "it will happen" case study. Abrupt climate change is possible within a few decades but is unlikely. The Pentagon creates such scenarios covering a wide variety of issues so in the event something does happen they're not wholly unprepared.

Again, as has been pointed out, premising an argument on the Pentagon analysis as a likelihood rather than simply as an outlying possibility would be counterproductive.

[jus_the_facts]

11. here's why this is an issue at present...the writing is on the wall....

http://www2.ucsusa.org/global_security/index.cfm

....we'll just wait and see I suppose...the future is uncertain and the end is always near...you must decipher the information to form your own perception of reality....

[htuttle]

12. "The threat to global stability vastly eclipses that of terrorism"

Sounds to me like it's a bit more than a 'what if' scenario if those who've read the report are stating that the problem eclipses terrorism as a threat.

[Viking12]

13. You missed my point

I'm well versed in climate change science. Abrupt climate change is a credible possibility. That, however, doesn't raise the Pentagon report to the level of certainty that some are making it out to be. As such, basing climate change mitigation advocacy on the Observer's reporting of the Pentagon report would not be an effective rhetorical strategy. It is too easy for those interested in dismissing climate change to point to the Guardian's coverage of the Pentagon report as a cry of "chicken little."

Some weaknesses that can be pointed out in the Observer's report: a) This is not a "new" report. The story was actually broken by none other than conservative Fortune Magazine weeks ago. b) The report is not classified. c) The report is clearly presented as a hypothetical. d) The report can be effectively cross-examined by a review of scientific literature (i.e. http://www4.nationalacademies.org/news.nsf/isbn/0309074347?OpenDocument)

There are many reasons to advocate climate change mitigation strategies. Abrupt climate change is one reason, but should not be the sole reason nor the primary reason if advocates want people to listen to them.

[Elidor]

10. "Disruption and conflict will be endemic features of life"

"Once again, warfare would define human life."

The report then concludes by saying, "We can't fucking wait to see it all come true."

[robertpaulsen]

14. LOL

I'm sure they also can't wait three years to see Amsterdam and the Left Coast flooded beyond repair. We'll see.

[bpyatt]

15. Just preparing like with any other case

They have preparations for Alien Invasions as well.