Skip to content

Flashback to 2004: The Pentagon tells Bush: climate change will destroy us

January 21, 2019
tags:

By Paul Homewood

 

Paul Matthews reminds us that we are now only a year or two away from our new Siberian climate in Britain, at least according to the Guardian in 2004:

 

image

 

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

https://cliscep.com/2019/01/18/climate-catastrophe-due-next-year/

 

Of course, we must not blame the Guardian. The Pentagon report was embraced by so-called eminent scientists such as Sir John Houghton, former chief executive of the Meteorological Office and Bob Watson, chief scientist for the World Bank and former chair of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.

So it must be right then!

Better dig out my long johns!

13 Comments
  1. avro607 permalink
    January 21, 2019 11:27 pm

    Scary,when you think that these people believe such nonsense,especially now that absolutely nothing untoward has come to pass.Their hands should not be anywhere close to a nuclear button.
    Just another example of the lust for funding that pushes to one side scientific integrity.

  2. Curious George permalink
    January 22, 2019 12:21 am

    It was not meant to make you dig out long johns. It was meant to make you wear diapers, just like eminent scientists and the Guardian staff.

  3. John F. Hultquist permalink
    January 22, 2019 12:23 am

    Tony Heller also posted about this. My comment:

    The report was commissioned by influential Pentagon defence adviser Andrew Marshall, …”

    He (Andrew M.) once seemed to have a better handle on US defense affairs (futuristic) than just about anyone else. The global warming virus got to him. Physical science was not his area; more into economics, — Rand type think tank. Now age 97.

  4. HotScot permalink
    January 22, 2019 12:31 am

    It would be funny were it not so tragic.

    We can show this to climate alarimists all we want and they will simply say the forecasts were a few years out.

    The best thing that could happen is for global temperatures to shoot through the 1.5C threshold and for nothing to happen, which it won’t.

    Then the buggers look really stupid.

    • January 22, 2019 9:06 am

      That is one of the ironic things about all the adjustments to the data – having made it look worse than it is, they are struggling to shown anything bad happening!

      And as this report shows, it’s been going in for so long now that forecasts that looked a safe distance in the future are now reaching the point where they are not just wrong but utterly discredited.

  5. Europeanonion permalink
    January 22, 2019 9:32 am

    I followed the link and found some interesting articles. The prominence of the Pentagon made me reflect on ‘Dr. Strangelove’. I see now that the liberal tendency, to have people look to them to save us from…whatever, has found its home in climate change.

    It’s come to be the worst kept secret that, in the end, the ‘informed’ had to tell you about. It’s the chicanery that is attached to such a topic that stops you in your tracks. Any politician devoid of real policy needs to know little about real world mechanisms when they have a gift that not only has a caring sentiment attached to it but that actually allows them a get-out clause for their failed policy making.

    Once, discovery and adventure were diffuse things that individuals pursued without reference to any other. This was an amazing process that, to my knowledge, only found coincidence in the joint discovery of calculus, Leibniz and Newton. Now we have a world pivoting on the motivations of states where consensus is the ruling instrument and where progress becomes that which has to be vetted, allowed, protected, refuted as a matter of universal acceptance or denial.

    We have now discovered how many people it takes to make a light work (or not, as will soon be the case). The state now has an opinion which it nurtures through grants and proscriptions (as manifested with the BBC). Scrutineers are those in states like Russia who pretty quickly find themselves marginalised for their divergent views. When the project belongs to the state you are cooked.

    All manner of impostures are allowed. Soon it becomes risible, not unlike protecting modern sensitivities by literally burning (banning) books that have within them sentiments predigested by the bien pensant. Censorship in the name of saving your soul. Extant but being hunted into oblivion by witch-finders and all those other echoes of Puritanism. The National Socialists had a policy on such things. Philistines who, in their manic form of expression, sought to deny culture and intellect.

    “We do not believe any group of men adequate enough or wise enough to operate without scrutiny or without criticism. We know that the only way to avoid error is to detect it, that the only way to detect it is to be free to inquire. We know that in secrecy error undetected will flourish and subvert”. – J Robert Oppenheimer.

  6. January 22, 2019 10:07 am

    We may laugh at this, but to many the catastrophe is happening now. This morning on the radio there were stories of Greenland melting “faster than previously thought”, and krill fleeing south towards Antarctica because of “rising” temperatures.

    The BBC makes sure that children (the voters of tomorrow) get the message via programmes on CBBC.

  7. Malcolm Bell permalink
    January 22, 2019 10:38 am

    The whole bunch of academics (the defining term for impractical theoreticians who have no personal responsibilty for the consequences of their “knowledge and research” and hence useless and dangerous) simply get away with this none sense. They should be liable for actual prosecution and punishment as I was as a practising Professional Engineer.

  8. Bidefordcamel permalink
    January 22, 2019 11:13 am

    Yet another example of politics masquerading as science. The climate catastrophe alarmists employ the blunderbuss technique – fire off as much as you can in the hope of hitting something.

  9. January 22, 2019 11:53 am

    “– costing millions of lives in wars and natural disasters..” We are 15 years in. The lives from “natural disasters ” continue to be lost as they have been down through history, but hardly the numbers they predicted.

    As to the wars, most have been caused by the deep state. They have infested everything they get their hands on and the Pentagon was not immune. Fortunately we “hired” someone to drain their swamp and other swamps. As a part of the drainage system, he is stopping the wars they ignited. He is even working without pay.

    I loved his Tweet the other day about it being cold in Washington and we could use some of their Global Warming…..

  10. Colin Brooks permalink
    January 22, 2019 1:27 pm

    I was ‘lucky’ enough to get a question to Bob Watson at a Monbiot/Guardian climate change conference, his bumbling waffle of an answer included his favourite phrase (in relation to AGW) “Its simple physics”.

  11. Gerry, England permalink
    January 22, 2019 1:46 pm

    If we are to become like Siberia that means they think that the gulfstream will stop. A better comparison would be Labrador and New Foundland which lie at the same latitude but are much colder without the flow of warm water. If the other post about cooling is correct then we will be getting colder but not for the reason the Pentagon report said. The gulfstream didn’t shut down in the last LIA so it is unlikely this time round.

    • January 22, 2019 5:28 pm

      The gulf stream is vastly overrated, NW Europe is much warmer in winter than NE USA simply because of the influence of the Atlantic ocean, which acts as a storage heater. NW Europe would only get really cold if prevailing winds reversed from westerly to easterly, which ain’t going to happen.

Comments are closed.

<span>%d</span> bloggers like this: