Calls theories on the cause ‘contradictory’
By Bryan Bender
Boston Globe / December 6, 2008
WASHINGTON – A new US military report has come under scrutiny for asserting that the scientific data on what is causing global warming is “contradictory” – a position one leading specialist said indicates the government still hasn’t fully embraced the urgency of climate change.
The long-range planning document, published Thursday by the US Joint Forces Command in Norfolk, Va., which is responsible for developing blueprints for future military strategy, is intended to provide a “basis for thinking about the world a quarter of a century from now.”
But a section of the 56-page report on climate change and natural disasters prompted criticism yesterday from some leading specialists who said that spreading the inaccurate perception that the causes of climate change remain an open question could result in government agencies not taking the issue seriously enough.
The report, titled Joint Operating Environment 2008, states that “the impact of global warming and its potential to cause natural disasters and other harmful phenomena such as rising sea levels has become a prominent – and controversial – national and international concern. Some argue that there will be more and greater storms and natural disasters, others that there will be fewer.”
It adds: “In many respects, scientific conclusions about the causes and potential effects of global warming are contradictory.”
That last line in particular was singled out at a panel discussion hosted yesterday by the Center for Strategic and International Studies, a Washington think tank, on the topic of climate change and national security.
Sharon Burke, a former Pentagon and State Department official who is now a specialist at the Center for a New American Security, said the report was factually “wrong” and “out of line,” saying that there is a wide consensus that human activity, namely the production of greenhouse gases, is responsible for global warming.
Other specialists had similar reactions when they read the report.
“It’s very wrong,” said Kerry Emanuel, a professor of atmospheric science at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology whose work was cited in the military report. “The jury is not out” on what is causing global warming, he added. “I don’t know where that statement came from, but it’s pretty bizarre.”
Emanuel also took issue with the report’s assertions about future storm intensity.
“Everyone pretty much agrees that the intensity of events could go up with global warming, although we argue how much,” he said in an interview.
The Joint Forces Command maintains that it is fully cognizant of the threat posed by climate change, saying the purpose of the report was not to debate what is or isn’t causing global warming.
“We are in complete agreement that climate change will be a national security driver in the future,” said Rear Admiral John M. Richardson, director of strategy for the command. “We are focused on the implications of climate change. We see what is happening. What is causing it is not in our purview. The commanders have to deal with the effects.”
He added in an interview yesterday: “Don’t take away that we think it is any less important.”
At yesterday’s conference, specialists agreed that the cascading effects of global warming – including drought, flooding, population flows, and disease epidemics – present the United States and other countries with enormous security threats in the years ahead – warnings that have been echoed by recent Pentagon reports and intelligence assessments.
Ronald Sugar, the CEO of Northrop Grumman, one of the nation’s leading defense companies, spoke of the need for private industry and the government to begin the difficult task of bridging the enormous knowledge base about what is happening to the earth’s climate to development of technical solutions that can help repair it.
“We have to build something that does not exist,” Sugar said.
But Burke said in a follow-up interview that it remains worrisome that some in the military command responsible for helping prepare for future dangers still appear to question the science of why global warming is occurring. She believes there are many in the government who still don’t fully embrace it. That makes it far more difficult for the leadership necessary to move the country to make the enormous changes necessary, she said.
If the climate models accumulate more C02 at the poles than the equator, and the insulation factor in the models is correct, the temperature gradient difference will be less.
Now, where did they get that idea? The poles of Mars?
OT, but that Hansen comment that a tax is better than cap & trade probably deserves a thread.
I think he’s probably right if you are going to charge for carbon use, but I wonder if his making such a public comment is an indication that perhaps he is setting himself up for a reversal!
Humans change climate? Sort of like a flea climbing up an elephant’s leg with rape on its mind.
Except that people in the military can spell “intelligence”. 😉
Except that it’s not honest to promote apocalypse without evidence.
J.Peden (11:44:33) :
“Shouldn’t people have to actually sign a specific statement affirming or denying the statement – in order to record their real opinions and to add up the numbers? Moreover, just what would this “consensus” mean or constitute numerically? 50.1 vs 49.9%?”
I propose the Governments of the world establish professional licensing programs with the licensing fees going toward “solutions”. Just about anyone can be licensed, but they would be subject to whatever penalties other licensing programs levy on one who fails in their professional duties. Missing the direction of any Climate Change might be one reason.
mybe global freezing it not such a bad idea
http://www.snowboardclub.co.uk/news-7604.html
Steve Keohane
any idea how you can melt so much ice overnight?
are the pics some how “adjusted”
Santa forgot his driver’s license and had to return to the pole to get it. Then decided it was too damned cold for a test run so stayed home to snuggle with the Mrs. By the way, because Rudolph had his headlight on, we now know that the toy station (or maybe the home residence) is not actually at the pole but further south and nearly behind the iron curtain.
I wants heard an OSU prof complain that the proven null hypothesis research never gets published to the detriment of scientific advance. If you don’t find anything, that is as important to know as when you find something. Making scientists pay for wrong conclusions would drive them towards unethical practices more strongly than their paycheck does right now.
Freezing Finn:
Let’s see if I got it right.
Now, whereas AGW is considered a hoax by most people here (incl. myself) involving most of the world’s goverments, the UN and other intergovermental organizations, numerous transnational corporations and a handful of scientists – let alone the mainstream media and the public (hey, we’re talking about millions of people here) – “chemtrails”, on the other hand, are just a “ludicrous fantasy”?
The description of “hoax” to describe the AGW behemoth is in no way accurate, though the word may be used occasionally as a shortcut. In short, it is an industry based on a simple hypothesis which was never proven. Its original proponents had their own varying motivations for wanting it to be true, be they political or monetary. In time, though, it took on a life of its own, with numerous and interconnecting feedbacks. Careers, both political, scientific and others have been built on AGW, and are now dependent on it.
Not so with the “Chemtrails” fantasy. They are contrails, nothing more. I find the arguments for them about as convincing as the ones for the WTC conspiracy.
Jeff Alberts (10:23:29) : “…Except that people in the military can spell “intelligence”. ”
So help me, Jeff, I got a resume once that said: “When i was in the military, I was in military inteligence (sic).”
Pete (10:01:58) : “…that Hansen comment that a tax is better than cap & trade probably deserves a thread.”
Yes, Pete, I’d been thinking the same thing, that in a way, Hansen may have blinked. Definitely deserves a thread, and not a knee-jerk rush to judgment.
Robert Bateman (09:44:22) : “If the climate models accumulate more C02 at the poles than the equator…”
I don’t recall seeing any statement like that, Robert.
Geoff Alder (06:59:43) : “…in areas subject to frosts, (so they tell me) when there is no night cloud cover, there can be severe frost….”
Ja, Geoff. I was told in Physics class that an open Thermos bottle could accumulate liquid air in the desert on a still, clear night. The black body temperature of the night sky is 4°K. Never tried it, though.
Steve Berry (08:46:00) : “…there is nothing wrong with sarcasm at all, in fact it’s very often appropriate….”
Yes, Steve, I must admit that at times I find sarcasm hard to resist, given the nonsense we see off-site from rabid AGW’ers. (Still, I agree with Leif in principle. IMO, like Tabasco sauce, sarcasm should be used sparingly.) Thank you, Steve.
And thanks, Leif. I always enjoy your input, even though I don’t fully agree with some of it.
Compare today’s Cryoshpere image of Arctic Ice extent with yesterday’s:
http://igloo.atmos.uiuc.edu/cgi-bin/test/print.sh?fm=12&fd=06&fy=2008&sm=12&sd=07&sy=2008
Maybe yesterday’s image was the work of Santa’s helpers
Dr. Pachauri strikes again! Attack on bovine flatulence. Can homo sapiens be far behind (pardon the pun).
Proposed fee on smelly cows, hogs angers farmers: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20081205/ap_on_bi_ge/farm_scene_cow_tax_2
MONTGOMERY, Ala. – For farmers, this stinks: Belching and gaseous cows and hogs could start costing them money if a federal proposal to charge fees for air-polluting animals becomes law.
“It makes perfect sense if you are looking for ways to cut down on meat consumption and recoup environmental losses,” said Bruce Friedrich, a spokesman in Washington for People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals.
“We certainly support making factory farms pay their fair share,” he said.
I don’t know if this is bogus or not: click
But I suspect it is. If the someone could control the weather, Phoenix and Las Vegas would have no more worries about lack of water.
@Ed Scott (16:53:28) :
You posted: “Dr. Pachauri strikes again! Attack on bovine flatulence. Can homo sapiens be far behind (pardon the pun).”
Proposed fee on smelly cows, hogs angers farmers: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20081205/ap_on_bi_ge/farm_scene_cow_tax_2
MONTGOMERY, Ala. – For farmers, this stinks: Belching and gaseous cows and hogs could start costing them money if a federal proposal to charge fees for air-polluting animals becomes law.
“It makes perfect sense if you are looking for ways to cut down on meat consumption and recoup environmental losses,” said Bruce Friedrich, a spokesman in Washington for People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals.
“We certainly support making factory farms pay their fair share,” he said.”
If I’m not mistaken, a vegetarian diet tends to produce a higher proportion of greenhouse gases than a good ol’ colon-cloggin’ meat and potatoes diet (vegans and vegetarians please feel free to jump in and correct me).
If so, we’ll all pay about the same if humans pay for their (ahem) personal emmisions. The meat eaters will pay the passthrough cost from the farm and the veggie folks will pay more directly.
What I really want to know is who will go around monitoring human emmisions? Will this new job count towards the 2.5 million jobs soon to be created? I don’t think I really want to read that job description when it’s posted. ;o)
Good God. I meant “once”, not wants. Damned global warming.
Smokey (17:49:59) :
Probably about as bogus as the chemtrails Haarp is linked with.
Try the source: http://www.haarp.alaska.edu/haarp/faq.html
If it’s not bogus, I’d say HAARP’s aim needs work.
H.R.
Reflecting on the general population and noting the number of citizens who are willing to mind your business as well as their own, there should be no shortage of volunteers for the monitoring ass-ignments. I am curious about the job description and the name for the agents. I am sure the EPA can come up with a catchy acronym. It might be prudent to buy stock in the Bean-O Company. In Washington, D. C., and in the words of the esteemed Senate majority leader, the new US$71 million visitors center, which cost US$621 million, alleviated the necessity for our elected representatives to smell the stench of We the People. There is a stench in Washington, D. C., but it does not derive from We the People.
Jeff Alberts (10:23:29) :
Robert Bateman (09:44:22) : “If the climate models accumulate more C02 at the poles than the equator…”
I don’t recall seeing any statement like that, Robert.
Try getting a stronger understanding of the logic of “If….then”.
The AGW crowd beats up on the Anti-AGW crowd and vice versa.
Did it ever occur to anyone that the answer might actually be …
both, boss? Global cooling can occur with lack of sunspot activity despite CO2 increase and Global warming can occur with high sunspot activity in the presence of high C02.
Sort of like a filter. You don’t record much blue light when the star is a red giant, but you sure do when it’s a type O.
What you folks need is Carl Sagan, somebody to connect to John Q. Public.
I just want to go on the record and surprise everyone by saying this juror is still out. The world has lost it’s little blue marbles.
Meanwhile, activism rears its head again:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/essex/7770513.stm
Hope they wrapped up warm, it was pretty chilly (for southern England) last night.
hmccard (13:07:48) :
OT
Compare today’s Cryoshpere image of Arctic Ice extent with yesterday’s:
http://igloo.atmos.uiuc.edu/cgi-bin/test/print.sh?fm=12&fd=06&fy=2008&sm=12&sd=07&sy=2008
Maybe yesterday’s image was the work of Santa’s helpers
and other Cryosphere observers.
It is not the first of April, so a prank by a graduate student seems unlikely. Maybe to see if anybody is watching? 🙂
If it is not a prank, since it has ice colors the only thing it could be is an instantly freezing geothermal plume?
unless it is in topic and it is some military test?
“” Ed Scott (16:53:28) :
Dr. Pachauri strikes again! Attack on bovine flatulence. Can homo sapiens be far behind (pardon the pun). “”
Well I have the perfect solution for Dr Pachauri.
In the firm belief that charity begins at home, I suggest that the good doctor focus his entire energies on ridding this planet of that well known scourge; the “sacred” cows of India. Utterly worthless and serving no useful purpose to mankind, they should be easy for the Doctor to get eliminated.
When you have achieved that Dr Pachauri, then come and talk to us about what WE should do to satisfy you.
Mind your own business first Dr Pachauri.
Continuing on the maybe OT bow on the december 6 cryosphere image of the arctic, the link
http://arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/cryosphere/IMAGES/ has 4 jpg images from different angles /projections.
On strange natural phenomena I would like to describe the starlings which come in huge, literally huge, flocks from all over europe to spend the winter in greece. Every day they rise in huge synchronous flocks and go towards the woods and fields, and every sunset they come back, usually roosting in very specific trees downtown and making a guano mess below.
Once, I thought I saw a huge shining metalic elongated object towards the sunset: UFO :). It was a starling flock coming to roost beating its wings in synchrony so that the white side underwing flashed like metal.
The other morning while going down on the fields they made a huge spiral staircase shape from a kilometer up to landing.
This bow of course cannot be from living things. I can see a huge plume of steam though, freezing on the edges into icicles making such a shape for these instruments.