Skip to content

Pentagon Flashback–Climate Change To Destroy Us This Year!!

January 1, 2020

By Paul Homewood


You’ll be pleased to learn if the Siberian climate does not get you this year, nuclear conflict, mega-droughts, famine and rioting most certainly will! After all, scientists said.




According to the Grainuda in 2004:

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.

Apparently therefore we are already experiencing ‘catastrophic shortages of water and energy supply’ and ‘widespread flooding caused by rising sea levels creating major upheaval for millions’. (Now, where did I put that snorkel?)

But we must not mock. The report must have been right because eminent scientists like John Schellnhuber, John Houghton and Bob Watson said it was.

So my advice is to get out your frogman’s gear and fur coats, and start building that nuclear shelter.

And be very careful, because if floods, snow and nuclear war do not get you, that flying pig probably will.

HAPPY 2020!!!

  1. HotScot permalink
    January 1, 2020 12:49 pm


    I just love posting these type of things on my FaceBook page. 🙂

    • Pancho Plail permalink
      January 1, 2020 6:04 pm

      I hope I have upset a lot of trolls on the Daily Telegraph blog by posting this. They are always posting links to the Guardian so I thought I would help them out. A happy new year to Paul and everyone else here, it looks like it might be a good year.

  2. charles wardrop permalink
    January 1, 2020 12:53 pm

    We’re all doomed, there is no hope if the Penragon miseries are correct.
    No proven or even likely prophylaxis is available, decarbonisation being a shot in the dark.
    However, no evidence is presently provided.
    As Nils Bohr said,”Prediction is difficut, especially when it concerns the future”!

    He was wiser than the doomsters in the Pentagon!

  3. January 1, 2020 1:08 pm

    Now wouldn’t it be good if the BBC were to interview these crazy old alarmists (King, Houghton, Watson) about what they said 20 years ago?

    Happy New to all, except the catastrophists

  4. Sheri permalink
    January 1, 2020 1:08 pm

    Just substitute “insane climate activists and the billionaires that fund them” for “climate change” and the article increases in accuracy a thousandfold. Climate will not cause war, starvation, etc, but the activist are doing their utmost best to that end goal. Children are completely indoctrinated, so look for that war, starvation and doom to arrive soon. Maybe parents should have cared a whit about those kids they made instead of hating their offspring.

  5. January 1, 2020 1:11 pm

    Chicken Little flies again!!!!!

  6. john cooknell permalink
    January 1, 2020 1:21 pm

    in 1998 I was told in writing by the Met Office senior forecaster, after one of their more obvious wrong predictions, that their robust modelling would mean UK would have the climate of the South of France within 20 years.

    I replied that even though this prospect was pleasant, perhaps, latitude, geography and the North Atlantic jet stream might intervene and the climate would remain as ever disappointing, I advised him to always take his coat!

    He replied I was an idiot. He retired before I got opportunity to say, I told you so.

  7. howardpaul permalink
    January 1, 2020 1:36 pm

    Having a clear memory of our street party celebrating the end of WW2, I never expected to enter the third decade of the 21st century. But another early memory is seeing, in real life, a man wearing a billboard saying “The end of the world is nigh”. (Liverpool Pier Head c1948)

    And the one thing I have learnt in my passage through this vale of tears is that

    • howardpaul permalink
      January 1, 2020 1:41 pm

      CONTINUED! Pressed wrong button


      Nuclear armageddon: Imminent ice age: no more tinned salmon: ozone depletion; peak oil; AIDS wiping us all out: and now the climate crisis.

      There is something innate in a proportion of homo sapiens that is not at all sapiens, and seems to need the prospect of imminent destruction to survive. What a perfect paradox in a world so much better than ever in all history.

      • Mr Allan Morgan permalink
        January 1, 2020 5:34 pm

        You forgot to mention New variant CJD. That was going to account for a few of us.

    • gosportmike permalink
      January 1, 2020 5:51 pm

      Unless the first decade of the century was one year short the third decade does not start until the end of this year.

      • Tony Budd permalink
        January 1, 2020 6:19 pm

        But surely the first year of the current era was AD 0, wasn’t it? And why was the Great Exhibition held in 1851 and not 1850? They obviously miscalculated the first year of the second half of the nineteenth century!

      • Duker permalink
        January 1, 2020 7:49 pm

        We went through this at the ‘start of the new millennium’ , which was 1 Jan 2000.

      • Gerry, England permalink
        January 2, 2020 1:21 am

        Somebody wrote that it was pedantic to say that this is not the start of the next decade. I don’t see how being correct is pedantic. Only Cambodia has had a year zero as far as I know. The dimwits in the media must take a lot of the blame as they can’t wait to do their reviews of the decade. Had to listen to that sort of drivel on BT Sport today. And don’t even start with the revision of football history to be only the premier league period.

  8. ray sanders permalink
    January 1, 2020 2:07 pm

    I must have too much time on my hands!!!! But I have recently taken to having a go back at the Graun. In the last month I have complained to the “readers” section regarding factual inaccuracies in four of their articles and on each occasion (to their credit) they have issued corrections.
    The last article I did this on was this one from Clea Skopoliti
    All the other three articles were by Jillian Ambrose so naturally you would expect them to be pure BS.
    Today i have gone for this daft piece of dross
    I will post if I get a response to this one.
    p.s. does the Graun only employ women with art’s degrees?

    • Joe Public permalink
      January 1, 2020 2:17 pm

      The Graun’s ‘Zero Carbon’ conveniently includes nuclear’s 16.8% contribution!

      Their figures show wind + solar + hydro generated 26.5%

      Nat gas generated 38.4%

      Coal generated 2.1%

      • ray sanders permalink
        January 1, 2020 2:45 pm

        It’s worse than that, they include imports as “zero carbon” despite the current 1000MW coming over the Britned at over 400g CO2 equivalent per kWh.
        Furthermore how is solar rooftop generation at 48g CO2 per kWh called zero?

      • It doesn't add up... permalink
        January 1, 2020 8:22 pm

        It’s even worse that that. The BritNed is supplied by Uniper’s MPP3 power station next door to the HVDC converter station at Maasvlakte. It’s a modern station, so it is much more efficient, at around 45% when operated in baseload. That means it’s probably producing around 550 gCO2/kWh.

  9. January 1, 2020 2:26 pm

    Reblogged this on Climate-

    • nadeembutt permalink
      January 1, 2020 11:23 pm

      Blocking this crap blog.

  10. john cooknell permalink
    January 1, 2020 2:53 pm

    Flooding occurred locally at a place it does once every ten years or so.

    Climate Change was getting blamed until I pointed out to the “climate emergency” gang that the culvert was blocked with half a tree, that might explain it.

    But strangely some people still wanted to blame climate change, they had to believe.

  11. MrGrimNasty permalink
    January 1, 2020 3:15 pm

    Village elder, in the Magnificent 7.

    “They are afraid of everyone and everything. They are afraid of rain and no rain. The summer may be too hot, the winter too cold.”

    Nothing changes!

  12. Harry Passfield permalink
    January 1, 2020 3:38 pm

    Recovering from a good NYE party, family is relaxing watching the moving wallpaper that is BBC’s repeat of Attenborough’s 7 continents documentary. At one point, as he rounds up the prog with his usual riff on climate change he narrates over a scene of bad weather, claiming that ‘climate change is leading to increasingly bad weather’. Now, someone please correct me if I’ve got this wrong but isn’t it weather that makes up the climate, not the other way round?

    • tonyb permalink
      January 1, 2020 4:46 pm


      As little as one warm day can make climate whereas it takes 30 years with cold weather.

  13. Chaswarnertoo permalink
    January 1, 2020 4:55 pm

    Reading the Graun. gives an insight into the horror of mental illness.

  14. leeteddy41 permalink
    January 1, 2020 5:21 pm

    Same in today’s Times.Emily Gosden with the same piece. It would appear that a sort of hysteria overcomes female jornos when confronted by“climate”issues. Whether it is the science that is beyond them I know not. There again, maybe it says a lot about the editor.
    I recently took issue with a fejorno on Cornwall Live ,suggesting sea rise swamping Truro cathedral.
    Why bother with truth when you can have lashings of hysteria.

  15. tonyb permalink
    January 1, 2020 5:32 pm

    The 2004 report carried here reminds me of the detailed report compiled by the CIA in 1974 forecasting a return to the little ice age. Global cooling was all the rage back in the 60’s and early 70’s although our Wikipedia friend William Connelly told us it was all a myth, in his report carried very widely

    Click to access CIAclimateResearchIntellProbs_1974.pdf

    • Curious George permalink
      January 1, 2020 5:37 pm

      How many CIA analysts ever got a Nobel? None? Too bad, they are the cream ..

  16. Curious George permalink
    January 1, 2020 5:35 pm

    Happy New Year to everybody. Of course, the Climate Change will destroy us this year, as usual. I don’t even notice any more.

  17. dennisambler permalink
    January 1, 2020 5:47 pm

    Houghton had us doomed in 2016:

    Click to access Briefing_18_Joseph_JTH.pdf

    “Joseph in Egypt”
    “For two years now there has been famine in the land and for the next five years there will not be ploughing or reaping. But God sent me ahead of you to preserve a remnant on earth and to save your lives by a great deliverance.

    What is the particular message of the story to us today? We face a climate crisis of enormous
    magnitude and proportions, not local but global, not of 7 years duration but lasting indefinitely. Information about it has not come through dreams but through science. Many hundreds of scientists representing the world scientific community have got together, through the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) to provide the necessary climate forecast and to propose to governments what needs to be done.

    In December 2009, the world’s nations meet in Copenhagen to set targets and a timetable for action. Christians are calling for worldwide prayer and many are saying it is the most important meeting the world has ever seen.

    Four thousand years ago Joseph had seven years to prepare for his climate crisis. Today, action is required just as urgently. Pharoah and Joseph had 7 YEARS. So have we 2016.

    Watson was imposed on us by Al Gore following his UK visit in March 2007. In October 2006, when presenting the Stern Review, Gordon Brown announced he had “hired” Al Gore to advise the British Government on climate change. Gore was here in March, on July 5th 2007, Watson’s apppointment was announced.

    Gore wrote in his blog at the time, (post now disappeared, even from Wayback),

    “I had some really interesting and productive meetings in London this week — discussing the climate crisis with the Chancellor of the Exchequer Gordon Brown, who is widely expected to be the next Prime Minister when Tony Blair retires.

    Chancellor Brown has introduced a package of binding CO2 reductions in the United Kingdom that represent real leadership. The same day I met with the leader of the Conservative Party, David Cameron, and 80 of his fellow Tory Members of Parliament.

    They were unanimous in their determination to propose meaningful solutions to the climate crisis. There has been a revolution in British politics, with the two largest parties now wholeheartedly committed to CO2 reductions and international leadership to solve the climate crisis.”

    26 March, 2007 – Al Gore in Cambridge – Public Lecture
    Gore’s presentation will offer a passionate and inspirational view of the urgent need for action in order to prevent the dire and irrevocable changes to the planet that global warming threatens.

    Watson’s leaving party at the World Bank 13th July, 2007

    “After 11 years at the Bank, Robert Watson is leaving to become Chair of Environmental Science and Science Director of the Tyndall Centre at the University of East Anglia, United Kingdom, and to join the British Government’s Department for Environment, Food, and Rural Affairs (Defra) as Chief Scientific Adviser. Along with former and current colleagues, he spoke about his struggle to bring the issue of climate change to the world’s attention, and how he plans to continue this work at his new jobs.”

    Jack Gibbons, Watson’s former boss at the White House, read aloud a letter written to Watson by Al Gore. In this letter, Gore calls Watson his “hero of the planet,” commends him on his incredible career and contributions, and congratulates him on his new jobs.

    Gibbons also spoke about the challenges facing scientists whose scientific evidence is often viewed not as strict science but as efforts to steer policy.”

    He succeeded Mike Hulme at Tyndall, who had just blotted his copybook with a BBC interview decrying alarmism, criticising Tony Blair, and by implication, David King, in November 2006:
    I have found myself increasingly chastised by climate change campaigners when my public statements and lectures on climate change have not satisfied their thirst for environmental drama and exaggerated rhetoric.

    Some recent examples of the catastrophists include Tony Blair, who a few weeks back warned in an open letter to EU head of states: “We have a window of only 10-15 years to take the steps we need to avoid crossing a catastrophic tipping point….we now have the militancy of the Stop Climate Chaos activists and the megaphone journalism of the Independent newspaper, with supporting rhetoric from the prime minister and senior government scientists.

    It was announced in July 2007 that Hulme had stood down as Director of Tyndall and was taking a year’s sabbatical from UEA. Within a year, Watson was turning up the heat:

    “The UK should take active steps to prepare for dangerous climate change of perhaps 4C according to one of the government’s chief scientific advisers.”

    XR have now taken over from Stop Climate Chaos, again with the tacit approval of government. They can then quote “public anxiety” as rationale for climate policy.

  18. Nancy & John Hultquist permalink
    January 1, 2020 6:28 pm

    I do not think this report – secret Pentagon, etc. – has been properly characterized.
    One responsibility of the US administration, the President, and the military (“the Pentagon”) is to assess the dangers to the Nation, that is national security. The Office that does this is – Department of Defense’s Office of Net Assessment –

    the Director shall develop and coordinate net assessments of the standing, trends, and future prospects of U.S. military capabilities and military potential in comparison with those of other countries or groups of countries in order to identify emerging or future threats or opportunities for the United States.” [Wikipedia]

    See here:

    Can anyone predict what Kim Jong-un will do, or what will happen in Iran (Ali Hosseini Khamenei age 80) as the current leaders depart?
    It is not responsible to ignore such things, and climate too, as one of the World’s leading nations.
    Assessments and scenarios are not predictions but many of them are secret, more or less.

    • I_am_not_a_robot permalink
      January 1, 2020 8:39 pm

      Misinterpretation may be due to The Guardian’s effortless slide from the conditional “could” at the top to “will” assertions used fifteen times in the rest of the article.

    • I_am_not_a_robot permalink
      January 1, 2020 9:09 pm

      Not to labour the point, there is a big difference between ‘a large asteroid could collide with Earth in the next twenty years’ and ‘a large asteroid will collide in the next twenty years’.

    • It doesn't add up... permalink
      January 1, 2020 9:13 pm

      I have personal experience of working in the field of creating scenarios for the sorts of circumstances you mention. Indeed, I encountered Peter Schwartz in the early 1980s while I was doing so. In those days he was a little more level headed, and it’s possible that he found it necessary to couch scenarios in line with some new green orthodoxy in order to get a hearing. But in my time when I was consulted by very senior people in government and industry, such thoughts were unnecessary. Indeed, I started out in my first job looking at some of the Limits to Growth projections and evaluating them in a small multi disciplinary team. We concluded that they were bunk, while offering alternative possible futures that were more credible (and indeed our projections turned out to span the reality of what actually happened). We didn’t need to couch them in green mantras. Later, when I was concerned with the future of the Middle East (in those days it was newly Ayatollah Khomeini, and the evergreen Saddam who were at the forefront of evaluations), and other global events (I was perhaps noted for my analysis of the likely collapse of the USSR, which proved highly prescient), climate was not the agenda. There was genuine hope that biological science would succeed in feeding mankind, as indeed it has done.

      Looking at the world today, it is the retreat of the West and the increasing dominance of China that is setting the agenda. It is not climate, but the false belief in climate astrology that is a key enabler. I re-read Charles Mackay and pinch myself. We are a thousand years on from this – or are we?

      An epidemic terror of the end of the world has several times spread over the nations. The most remarkable was that which seized Christendom about the middle of the tenth century. Numbers of fanatics appeared in France, Germany, and Italy at that time, preaching that the thousand years prophesied in the Apocalypse as the term of the world’s duration were about to expire, and that the Son of Man would appear in the clouds to judge the godly and the ungodly. The delusion appears to have been discouraged by the Church, but it nevertheless spread rapidly among the people.

      The scene of the last judgment was expected to be at Jerusalem. In the year 999, the number of pilgrims proceeding eastward, to await the coming of the Lord in that city, was so great that they were compared to a desolating army. Most of them sold their goods and possessions before they quitted Europe, and lived upon the proceeds in the Holy Land. Buildings of every sort were suffered to fall into ruins. It was thought useless to repair them, when the end of the world was so near. Many noble edifices were deliberately pulled down. Even churches, usually so well maintained, shared the general neglect. Knights, citizens, and serfs, travelled eastwards in company, taking with them their wives and children, singing psalms as they went, and looking with fearful eyes upon the sky, which they expected each minute to open, to let the Son of God descend in his glory.

  19. January 1, 2020 8:46 pm

    Reblogged this on Climate Collections.


  1. We’re doomed, we’re all doomed! – The First Street Journal.

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: