President Obama Demands Intelligence Agencies Draft Plans to Combat Climate Change

green_spy

Guest essay by Eric Worrall

Just how far does the President intend to go, with ordering Intelligence Agencies to combat climate change?

Obama inserts climate change into national security strategy

President Obama is asking 20 federal offices to work together on a national security strategy to address climate change.

Obama signed a directive on Wednesday telling the offices to develop a “federal climate and national security working group” to “identify the U.S. national security priorities related to climate change and national security, and develop methods to share climate science and intelligence information to inform national security policies and plans,” the White House said.

He charged the group with developing a climate change action plan within 90 days, laying out steps for sharing climate data, research ideas and vulnerability assessments for parts of the United States that are threatened by climate change over the next three decades.

Obama also asked the agencies — which cover climate offices and national security missions — to write implementation plans for combatting climate change.

Read more: http://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/297070-obama-inserts-climate-change-into-national-security-strategy

How does the CIA, the NSA, and all the other agencies in the bottomless government agency alphabet soup respond to a demand that they plan for combatting climate change? Do they simply analyse what is happening around the world, and make stuff up when it becomes apparent that climate is not a significant issue? Or do they try to look busy, by harassing ordinary people who oppose government policy?

The USA, pretty nearly all countries have experienced chilling episodes of over zealous government officials who abused their authority, when they succumbed to noble cause corruption.

In 2013, President Obama was forced to apologise when the IRS abused their power, harassing and targeting right wing political opponents of the President.

Ordering intelligence agencies to focus on climate change has the potential to take this harassment of political opponents to an entirely new level. An adverse tax audit is hideously inconvenient, but it is not likely to cost you your life.

0 0 votes
Article Rating
133 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
stevekeohane
September 22, 2016 9:01 am

Obama’s SOP:
1. waste as many resources as possible
2. hope #1 causes a crisis
3. expand power

Reply to  stevekeohane
September 25, 2016 5:31 pm

Fortunately this is one directive that will quietly be ignored.

Resourceguy
September 22, 2016 9:02 am

Well, they don’t have anything else to do. Besides the political appointees need to look busy. This is what a modern civilization looks like. Just don’t call it productivity or earned income or hours worked. I’m still waiting for the executive order to study climate by the meat inspection agency and other crevices of the Federal bureaucracy.

Gus
September 22, 2016 9:03 am

A good enough reason to vote for Obama’s and Clinton’s opponent.

Walter Sobchak
Reply to  Gus
September 22, 2016 9:13 am

Which one the liar or the fraudster?

Reply to  Gus
September 22, 2016 9:40 am

Vote for the honest and far and away most competent ticket , the Libertarian governors .
End the dinosaur broadcast age duopoly .

Reply to  Bob Armstrong
September 22, 2016 10:00 am

But a vote for Johnson is a vote for Hillary! Or is it Trump? I forget which one is it currently?

Tom Judd
Reply to  Bob Armstrong
September 22, 2016 11:17 am

Years ago I may have agreed with you. But now we have a Libertarian Presidential candidate (Johnson) who believes in global warming and policies to mitigate it (small government?), and running mate (Weld) who supports gun control.

Reply to  Tom Judd
September 23, 2016 5:02 pm

Tom , I think Johnson is open to rational argument about AlGoreWarming . He mentioned in the LP candidate debates that Harrison Schmitt has told him it was crap . I met him in 2o12 and he’s certainly more open to rational argument than the Duopoly detritus which are the alternatives .

DonM
Reply to  Bob Armstrong
September 22, 2016 1:54 pm

A vote for the “Libertarian” governors will not end anything … at best, if there were enough votes, it may initiate something in the next election cycle.
Sadly, that something would likely turn into a sanders thing to garner enough popularity.

Reply to  DonM
September 23, 2016 5:12 pm

Watch the Johnson+Weld Rally in Seattle (9/17/2016) , https://youtu.be/6-TLR3PcOPg?t=1s . Drew Carey makes a number of points including that unlike , eg : Perot , the LP will be here stronger than ever next time and the time after that and … .
One thing , the contrast between their competence and that of the Duopoly bozos is so extreme it illuminates the utter corruption of the Duopoly exclusion of the choice which has surmounted the enormous hurdles just to get on everybody’s ballots .

DonM
Reply to  Bob Armstrong
September 22, 2016 1:55 pm

… would likely NEED TO turn into a …

ShrNfr
Reply to  Bob Armstrong
September 22, 2016 3:38 pm

Weld, Weld, Weld, let me think. Wasn’t he the guy who wanted to be the ambassador to Mexico under Bill Clinton? More seriously, I regard Mr. Weld as a reasonable person, and I do vaguely know him. I was not all that happy with him as governor though.
Gang, its not going to be either Johnson or Stein. Vote for the ones left. One of them will be president.

Reply to  ShrNfr
September 23, 2016 5:19 pm

“Gang, its not going to be either Johnson or Stein. Vote for the ones left. One of them will be president.”
I fail to follow your logic . Waste your vote on a dishonest doofus instead of registering your disgust — and voting for far and away the most qualified ticket ?

September 22, 2016 9:04 am

This should be an interesting reply thread. Just how much can the CIA do about a nonexistent threat?

SMC
Reply to  Tom Halla
September 22, 2016 9:07 am

A great deal. They’ll create a threat, just to be able to combat it.

RWturner
Reply to  SMC
September 22, 2016 12:10 pm

The problem here is that these agencies are being told to take each global warming alarmist publication as if they are 100% unequivocally factual. In turn, the media and alarmists will use the federal agency plans in a circular fashion claiming that the very existence of the plans bolsters their argument. It’s like a blind man leading a def man across a busy street.
Imagine had presidents of the past used this much junk science for political purposes and ordered agencies to operate under a false reality. It’s like if the feds of the 1920-30s were ordered to operate under the assumption that eugenics was necessary for the survival of our species, the results would be disastrous. Welcome to Orwellian America.

RWturner
Reply to  SMC
September 22, 2016 12:12 pm

As for the original question, ever heard of a false flag operation?
http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2015/02/41-admitted-false-flag-attacks.html

Paul
Reply to  Tom Halla
September 22, 2016 9:35 am

“Just how much can the CIA do about a nonexistent threat?”
Then whatever they choose to do would be the correct action to take, no?

Pop Piasa
Reply to  Paul
September 23, 2016 9:53 am

It just helps to have “an enemy without” and “enemies within”- all in the same imagined package. What a profound plan for propaganda propagation.

Reply to  Tom Halla
September 22, 2016 9:59 am

They have chased Jason Bourne around for 4 movies already and all he wants is to live in piece in a far corner of the world
/sarc in case it’s needed

E.M.Smith
Editor
Reply to  jgriggs3
September 22, 2016 10:27 am

Peace? Or pieces?…

Reply to  jgriggs3
September 22, 2016 12:42 pm

Doh, that’s what I get for being in a hurry. Good catch.

Owen in GA
Reply to  Tom Halla
September 22, 2016 10:24 am

Actually, the CIA has been directed to include climate change impacts in their threat assessments since the late 1990s. Clinton implemented it and Bush never rescinded it. DoD followed suit and include climate change in their 5 year outlook that drives all their procurement requests. This isn’t really all that new.

ShrNfr
Reply to  Tom Halla
September 22, 2016 3:39 pm

A nuclear winter ought to stop global warming in its tracks.

Pierre DM
Reply to  Tom Halla
September 22, 2016 8:41 pm

Round up the usual suspects…”Us deniers”

Reply to  Tom Halla
September 23, 2016 7:14 pm

RWTurner has it right. The answer is this administration would create an entire new bureaucracy within existing bureaucracies AND this will enable them to go after chosen adversaries under new regulations with different headings … further expanding the reach and power of central government. The social cost of carbon and NIC reports were all planned out to fit the answer and storyline that the administration wanted; and it was carefully planned out over a number of years during the past two terms of office to fit together like pieces of a puzzle with hundreds of pages reports, charts, tables; and the revised Social Cost of Carbon manipulation planned to come together at the end of this year – last year in the current president’s terms of office to be used in the new national security thrust. The narratives are crafted in declarative fashion as if true without thorough unbiased discussion of the key issues of climate sensitivity, uncertainties, and natural forcings, etc. The last SCC report briefly mentions that understanding of water vapor, particulates and solar variability are not well understood but it is buried. See my comparison of the 2010 SCC and updated 2013 SCC below at September 22, 2016 at 11:01 am.
The 2010 interagency SCC report highlighted a number of important limitations for which additional research is needed …. “the need to improve the quantification of non-catastrophic and catastrophic damages, the treatment of adaptation and technological change, and the way in which interregional and intersectoral linkages are modeled. While the updated version offers offer some improvements in these areas, further work (is) warranted. Important is the need to improve assessment of risk aversion for SCC estimation as well as the inability to perfectly substitute between climate and non-climate goods at higher temperature increases, both of which have implications for the discount rate used. EPA, DOE, and other agencies continue to engage in research on modeling and valuation of climate impacts that can potentially improve SCC estimation in the future.
If this was the language (gobbledygook) included, assume that the true meaning and intent of the words is well hidden. Conclusion is — the update was completed with large known gaps and inconsistencies in the climate model projections and in non man-made / natural forcings e.g., water vapor, particulates solar variability …

imamenz
September 22, 2016 9:05 am

Great idea Odumbo, take away resources from fighting terrorism. Worst president ever.

Walter Sobchak
Reply to  imamenz
September 22, 2016 9:12 am

What fight against terrorism? The one they would engage in if they were to do something like that, or they one that they are busy trying ignore.

george e. smith
Reply to  Walter Sobchak
September 22, 2016 10:19 am

For some individuals; well at least for one, banging your head against the wall would be fighting terrorism.
G

RWturner
Reply to  Walter Sobchak
September 22, 2016 12:02 pm

The Obamination that is POTUS says that fighting terrorists only makes them angry with us and creates more terrorists. Essentially he is saying the problem is us, not them. Worst president imaginable.

Simon
Reply to  Walter Sobchak
September 23, 2016 12:18 am

“The Obamination that is POTUS says that fighting terrorists only makes them angry with us and creates more terrorists. Essentially he is saying the problem is us, not them. Worst president imaginable.”
Well we may get to see how Trump goes rattling the hornets nest. My bet is far more people will die because of his “tough guy” stance rather than the “Obamination” diplomacy. I’m also picking he wont be one of the front line who take a bullet.

auto
Reply to  imamenz
September 22, 2016 1:47 pm

imamenz
“Worst president ever.”
Possibly; but didn’t you have a sort of Pre-President, ‘Triple George’ [Thanks to PJ O’Rourke] (who was portrayed by Nigel Hawthorne), who insisted you heated your harbours before putting the tea in.
Massachusetts way, I think. Or near by.
May he have been worse?
Goodness, didn’t you nearly end up marrying the French?
Auto – coming to the end of the week, and seeking solace.
Any solace.
And Triple George’s grand-daughter cuddled the child who would be the last Empress of India – and SHE knew the Duke [and possibly the Duchess?] of Cambridge.

Richard Keen
Reply to  imamenz
September 22, 2016 10:15 pm

There is no terrorism. Just a bunch of irate citizens protesting a stupid video.
There is no global warming. Just of bunch of ignorant citizens watching a stupid video.
Just a bunch of inconvenient truths.

Alan the Brit
Reply to  imamenz
September 23, 2016 2:50 am

As a Brit, my thoughts exactly!

Resourceguy
September 22, 2016 9:05 am

Watching movies of the Yellowstone supervolcano don’t count. Be original, but most of all be politically tuned in.

Resourceguy
Reply to  Resourceguy
September 22, 2016 9:06 am

In fact, subing out the work to the Sierra Club is advisable.

Joel Snider
September 22, 2016 9:08 am

I think everyone has underestimated how truly ambitious Obama is. Even me, and I thought he was prepared to go all the way. “By any means necessary”.
I remember the moment he won the presidency – not cheering, smiling, waving his arms. No, his was an expression of grim resolve. Kinda reminded me of Thulsa Doom in ‘Conan’. I didn’t have strong feelings about him then, other than knowing he came from academia and because of that, his views were likely much more radical, and certainly a LOT less pro-American than he ever let on (never mind the near total-effort to hide those college transcripts) – which is fine – it’s just not something I want in someone LEADING the country.
Don’t expect him to stop once his term is over either. He’s a man with a plan and he’s been setting all this up for years.

gnomish
Reply to  Joel Snider
September 22, 2016 9:46 am

weren’t you tipped off when he and al gore got nobel peace prizes?

george e. smith
Reply to  gnomish
September 22, 2016 10:22 am

Some reputedly intelligent people even admit to voting for him; not just once, but twice !
To be a part of history, I am sure.
G
Thank them very much.

Joel Snider
Reply to  gnomish
September 22, 2016 10:28 am

‘weren’t you tipped off when he and al gore got nobel peace prizes?’
Yup.

higley7
September 22, 2016 9:09 am

More than anything, his demand will be an excuse to grow these agencies even more and grow their budgets. Just another government expansion program.

Horace Jason Oxboggle
Reply to  higley7
September 22, 2016 2:59 pm

I eagerly await the agencies’ conclusion that the way to fight Climate Change is to use desalination plants. We Aussies have several (that aren’t actually doing anything) which could be shipped to wherever they so choose (e.g. the Himalayas, Antarctica, Greenland, the Obama Library site).

Walter Sobchak
September 22, 2016 9:11 am

Ordering a bureaucracy to to write memoranda full of meaningless gobbledygook is not exactly brave. I am sure that the security agencies will take to it like a duck to water. Not only that it will give them cover for not doing anything about the next 10 jihadists, like they did nothing about the last 10, all of whom were well known to them. Now they can neglect their real mission so that they can spend their time addressing a non problem, about which they could do nothing if it were a real problem.

SMC
September 22, 2016 9:11 am

Unfortunately, this is well within the President’s executive power to order… What a waste. Thank goodness he’s almost out of office. I wonder how much more damage he will attempt to do before he leaves. Hopefully we can keep Clinton out of office so these policies can be filed appropriately.

E.M.Smith
Editor
Reply to  SMC
September 22, 2016 10:03 am

How to fight “Climate Change” aka Global Warming:
1) Halt all NSF funding of it.
2) Close Federal Department of Education, just after issuing a mandate that Climate Change be dropped from texts and curricula.
3) Ban foreign funded NGOs (already done by Russia and maybe India)
4) Honor Russian international arrest warrant for George Soros (as damages, confiscate his “foundations” money)
5) Replace DOJ Hacks and FBI lapdogs. Turn them loose on Climate Fraud funding.
6) Do NOT fund any UN operations remotely related.
7) Recind any treaty or trade “agreement” with environmental enforcement commissions in them.
8) Require ALL climate related govt and academic conferences be funded by personal payments from the attendees, including air fare and lodging.
9) Ban any tranfer of government money to NGOs.
After that, we can asses what’s left…

bw
Reply to  E.M.Smith
September 22, 2016 10:52 am

10. Directly repudiate the IPCC.
11. Pull the plug on the entire United Nations. Not just withdraw the USA, rescind the UN charter.
12. Order a full independent review of EPA, NOAA and NASA for the purpose of removing waste, fraud and abuse. Prosecute and jail those responsible for any crimes. Then eliminate those agencies as constitutionally non-essential, with transfer of science related functions to privately funded companies.
13. Remove funding or subsidies from any Green/Renewable programs anywhere.
14. Publicly declare in a statewide address that the addition of Carbon Dioxide to the atmosphere is beneficial to all life on Earth.

Pat Frank
Reply to  E.M.Smith
September 22, 2016 12:10 pm

15. Remove Federal and state funding from universities that actively support “Critical Theory” schools and departments, all of which directly violate the academic tenure agreement of dispassionate non-political scholarship.

Reply to  Pat Frank
September 22, 2016 12:16 pm

Obama is so unpopular that something Stalinist like this could turn most of the voters into skeptics.

Reply to  E.M.Smith
September 22, 2016 7:59 pm

16: replace the IRS with a flat tax.

Tom Judd
Reply to  SMC
September 22, 2016 11:11 am

“I Wonder how much more damage he will attempt to do before he leaves.”
A lot. Presidents are known for waiting for the midnight hour (in other words; when they have ‘flexibility’ because they’re not running for reelection) to put through their most unpalatable and unpopular executive actions. Expect Obama to exceed any previous prez in this activity. To my knowledge at least 70 of the numerous edicts will carry substantial price tags.

AleaJactaEst
September 22, 2016 9:27 am

Fiddling while North Carolina burns.

Bubba Cow
Reply to  AleaJactaEst
September 22, 2016 10:11 am

time for golf ?

Catcracking
Reply to  AleaJactaEst
September 23, 2016 2:35 pm

No exactly, with 90 some visits by Sharpton to the White House starting around the time of the Ferguson riots, I can help but think Orchestration rather than Fiddling.

September 22, 2016 9:30 am

“President Obama is asking 20 federal offices to work together on a national security strategy to address climate change.”
By “climate change”, Obama means Catastrophic Manmade Global Warming (CAGW).
Prez says:
Let’s all study the very-scary impacts of global warming, in a world that is not warming dangerously, has not warmed significantly in about twenty years, and is probably about to get colder…
$ounds $orta $tupid.

September 22, 2016 9:37 am

There is a real and present threat Mr President
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3071598/Putin-spends-5m-cloud-dispersing-chemicals-sprayed-jets-ensure-good-weather-V-Day-Parade.html
Putin’s also working on a wind machine, snow machine, rain machine, thunder and lightning machine, hurricane machine, earthquake machine and has cloned The High Frequency Active Auroral Research Program (HAARP) so be very afraid.

DAV
September 22, 2016 9:38 am

Brings a new meaning to the term “lame duck”. Maybe ‘lame’ is a mental thing.

E.M.Smith
Editor
Reply to  DAV
September 22, 2016 10:16 am

I think it means he’s quacking up… 🙂

Doug
Reply to  E.M.Smith
September 22, 2016 12:07 pm

…and leaving a huge bill.

September 22, 2016 9:41 am

90 days.
He wants the report in 90 days. Two important take aways from that little tid bit.
1. He wants an actionable report tabled while he is still in office and can take some sort of action on it
2. The report is already written. There is no way something as complex as climate change can be tackled in a meaningful manner across so many agencies in 90 days. They’ll all be under the gun to take whatever has been written for them and stick it on their letter head so that Obama can claim there’s a consensus. Then the executive orders will rain down.
Is there any way you Americans can advance the date of your election? I don’t care who wins anymore, just get this guy away from the levers of power.

E.M.Smith
Editor
Reply to  davidmhoffer
September 22, 2016 10:32 am

If the agencies care at all about America, they will produce the report about January 30th and say “sorry we’re a bit late, it was complicated”…

Oldseadog
Reply to  davidmhoffer
September 22, 2016 10:54 am

I can write the report in 90 seconds, never mind 90 days.
” We have looked at all the evidence, man is having little effect on the climate of planet Earth, you don’t have to worry about it, Mr. President”
There you are. Now sit on it for 89 days, have a nice holiday somewhere, don’t answer the phone, put a message on your answering machine to say you are busy and press the “send” button on the 90th. day.

Scottish Sceptic
September 22, 2016 9:41 am

A long time ago a wise leader tried the same thing: Canute ordered the tide to stop coming in – except unlike Obama, Canute did it to show that no mere mortal can control the seas or climate which are constantly changing.

MarkW
September 22, 2016 9:41 am

We’re doing such a great job of catching terrorists that there should be no trouble diverting resources towards catching CO2 molecules.

September 22, 2016 9:46 am

The good news is that he will be gone soon. The bad news is that in his final days he has become obsessed with himself and his “legacy” unashamed to use our taxes to give himself that “legacy”.

MarkW
September 22, 2016 9:46 am

“Or do they try to look busy, by harassing ordinary people who oppose government policy?”
Thus ushering in the police state that most leftists dream of.

Neil Jordan
September 22, 2016 9:47 am

This should be a slam-dunk for the CIA. They already have the report:
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2012/05/25/the-cia-documents-the-global-cooling-research-of-the-1970s/
They probably dusted off that old report, converted to OCR, and are now doing a search and replace “cooling” to “warming”.

Resourceguy
Reply to  Neil Jordan
September 22, 2016 9:50 am

But it was no where political enough back then.

Kamikazedave
September 22, 2016 9:59 am

Here’s your plan, B Hussein:
1. If it rains, put on a raincoat.
2. If it snows, put on a winter coat and make sure the treads on your car are adequate.
3. If it’s hot, wear light clothing.
4. If a storm is coming, batten down the hatches.
There you go. I figure you were planning on pissing away billions of dollars we don’t have to develop this plan, so if you could send me check for a couple million dollars, we’ll call it quits.

E.M.Smith
Editor
Reply to  Kamikazedave
September 22, 2016 10:20 am

Plan A:
Board jet to Hawaii. Book morning Tee Time…

Catcracking
Reply to  Kamikazedave
September 23, 2016 2:49 pm

We already know he cannot handle an umbrella in the rain as he tried to walk under an arch with it open!

gbaikie
September 22, 2016 10:17 am

**How does the CIA, the NSA, and all the other agencies in the bottomless government agency alphabet soup respond to a demand that they plan for combatting climate change? Do they simply analyse what is happening around the world, and make stuff up when it becomes apparent that climate is not a significant issue? Or do they try to look busy, by harassing ordinary people who oppose government policy?**
It’s a good test to determine if intelligence agencies are utterly useless or not.
Obama has already proven that he is incompetent President, and as lame duck president it means little, but it’s significant in terms of how Clinton responds to it. So far Clinton is running away from this issue and running as Obama third term.

Bruce Cobb
September 22, 2016 10:18 am

This is devious. Once climate is considered to be a “national security threat”, then by extension, anyone opposing resulting policies could also be considered “security threats”.

nc
September 22, 2016 10:20 am

Can anyone else see a parallel between Obama coming to the end of his term and the movie, Dr. Strangelove?

E.M.Smith
Editor
Reply to  nc
September 22, 2016 10:23 am

Dr. Strangelove had better music… and a snack bar…
Obama is off key bad blues and sour grapes.

Paul Coppin
September 22, 2016 10:26 am

They need to tell that treasonous racist troll to just punt…

F. Ross
September 22, 2016 10:29 am

He charged the group with developing a climate change action plan within 90 days, laying out steps for sharing climate data, research ideas and vulnerability assessments for parts of the United States that are threatened by climate change over the next three decades.

Ranks right up there with the presidential order for the NASA outreach to the Muslim world.
Several bricks short of a full load!

mikewaite
September 22, 2016 10:32 am

Why not welcome this initiative?
These agencies have massive computer power, like NASA and some of the universities . However these will be operated not by climate scientists and activists, but by people who are not climate scientists but are used to taking data and extracting the most probable conclusions in the interests of national security (where getting things wrong could be very messy).
So the models and data run by the intelligence agencies will hopefully be run by people who do not approach the operation with a preconceived bias ( just in case that might be a constraining factor in some universities – hopefully not).

Catcracking
Reply to  mikewaite
September 23, 2016 2:56 pm

Come-on, even the intelligence folks knew they would get fired if they told him the unvarnished truth when they issued a false rosy report about the war effort against ISIS in the middle east. Think these folks want to get fired? http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/09/09/exclusive-50-spies-say-isis-intelligence-was-cooked.html

Catcracking
Reply to  Catcracking
September 23, 2016 2:57 pm

There is no honest person left in the Administration.

Leo Smith
September 22, 2016 10:35 am

Wouldn’t it be delicious, if they all came back and said that the real threat to America, was not climate change, but the measures taken in the name of halting it?

rogerknights
September 22, 2016 10:39 am

Previously,warmists have cited alarmist evaluations by the Defense Dept. to try to convince conservatives the threat is real. Isuspect this is more of the same.

John F. Hultquist
September 22, 2016 10:45 am

My bold.
parts of the United States that are threatened by climate change over the next three decades.
Parts is parts. Where’s the beef? Oh, sorry. The answer is zero. Or 42.
They will make things up.
Worst POTUS, ever.

September 22, 2016 10:46 am

The KGB must be delighted. Maybe Obama will ask the Air Force to figure out how to stop wind turbines from killing birds?

stinkerp
September 22, 2016 10:53 am

Agency Strategy To Combat Climate Change:
We will start considering options on Monday, January 23, 2017. The current contingency plan is to encourage friends and neighbors to vote for a Republican President.
Sincerely,
Common Sense Agency Director

September 22, 2016 11:01 am

The 90 day period from 9/21/2016 ends 12/19/2016. That’s plenty of time to roll out a huge batch of new executive orders / rule making on emissions (e.g., other GHGs), mileage standards, etc…. for example, on tractors, lawnmowers, chain saws, 2 stroke hedge and gas trimmers. motorboats, motorcycles, motorbikes, gas grills, four legged domesticated animals (bovinae, suine, caprinae, canidae …), avian and maybe even two legged humanoids (not all of which are domesticated based on recent activity). If they use the rigged revised Social Cost of Carbon rolled out in 2013 they will try to expand as much as possible the reach and jurisdiction of the EPA under the Clean Air Act, was adjudicated and supported by the Supreme Court in Mass v. EPA in 2007 making it iron clad law which this administrations has tried to get maximum mileage out of (pun definitely not intended) … are you suffocating yet, or what? The rigged SCC in the Obama / EPA revision in May 2013 by the Obama / EPA increased dramatically vs. the previous assessment which was completed over 2008-10. In particular the high risk / maximum fat tail SCC 3% – 95th percentile likelihood SCC increased a whopping $50 / ton in 2025 increasing to $80/ton in 2050. Of course the 3% – 95th percentile version is what will be used by regulators, shown here.
.comment image
.comment image

Ian W
Reply to  Danley Wolfe
September 22, 2016 1:12 pm

Just more for the next incumbent to rescind. Perhaps an Executive Order saying all Executive Orders since 2008 are rescinded with immediate effect. If their content is seen as required by Congress, then they may be introduced as separate Congressional Bills in their own right.

George Tetley
September 22, 2016 11:02 am

Absolutely incredible,
if he had another brain it would be lonely !
New word for the dictionary
Obrainless.

noaaprogrammer
Reply to  George Tetley
September 22, 2016 9:22 pm

B’roke-us Hinsaneless Obrainess

noaaprogrammer
Reply to  noaaprogrammer
September 22, 2016 9:25 pm

Obrainless

September 22, 2016 11:06 am

90 days? Pshaw!
90 seconds. Cite existing calculations that show stopping all U.S. CO2 emissions would have negligible effect on inflated climate change “projections.” No possible agency action could possibly affect the global climate.
Then again, having worked at a relatively high level in a Federal bureaucracy, it could take from the 90 days to forever.
I’m afraid that if I hear any more about climate wars and refugees, I’ll barf. Wild speculation.
If the U.S. military would have trouble fighting in a few more centimeters of water, then we are doomed to Sharia. If the U.S. military can’t protect its low-lying coastal installations from a few additional centimeters of sea level rise, then we are also doomed to Sharia.
Charlie Skeptic

MangoChutney
September 22, 2016 11:08 am

President Obama Demands Intelligence Agencies Draft Plans to Combat Climate Change

Typo in Draft – should be Daft
President Obama Demands Intelligence Agencies Daft Plans to Combat Climate Change

MangoChutney
Reply to  MangoChutney
September 22, 2016 11:48 am

Or even:
President Obama Defends Intelligence Agencies Daft Plans to Combat Climate Change

Gerald Machnee
September 22, 2016 11:11 am

Maybe the Central “Intelligence” Agency can do an intelligent assessment and report back that there is no danger.

Science or Fiction
September 22, 2016 11:16 am

“We have just gone through 70 years of communism, so why the hell would you want to go back to that?”
– Vaclav Klaus
“The largest threat to freedom, democracy, the market economy and prosperity, is no longer socialism. It is, instead, the ambitious, arrogant, unscrupulous ideology of environmentalism.”
Vaclav Klaus
Have a look at this “key-note speech” by United Nations executive director Felix Dodds at the United Nations Stakeholder Forum for a Sustainable Future.
Charismatic preachers belong in a church – not in the United Nations – I´m shocked.

Science or Fiction
Reply to  Science or Fiction
September 22, 2016 1:28 pm

Sorry for being a bit off-topic and a bit misleading. Felix Dodds is not a United Nations executive director. See Wikipedia for presumably correct information.

Mickey Reno
September 22, 2016 11:18 am

There is no depth too deep for Obama to sink to.

H. D. Hoese
September 22, 2016 11:20 am

Look on the bright side. They could examine and suggest extinction for all of the government programs that provide incentives for building where the alleged sea level will rise, and even without the rise, the storms, will and would do damage. The poorly thought out environmental programs have a habit of colliding with each other as noted just above. Send them a list?

Tom Judd
September 22, 2016 11:24 am

Doesn’t taking an agency with the word ‘intelligence’ in its title and tasking it to deal with climate change strike our all knowing president as a contradiction in terms?

September 22, 2016 12:00 pm

The Nobel committee gave him the Peace Prize from the outset for doing absolutely nothing; so getting a legacy one for global warming should be a doddle. After all the committee gave one to Al Gore for a rubbish documentary about the last polar bear on an ice-flow.

ScienceABC123
September 22, 2016 1:17 pm

That’s a simple task for the intelligence agencies. Simple hack into NOAA and the other “climate change” agencies; find and extract the raw data; freely distribute said data to the real scientific community. Viola, an immediate decrease in the global temperature of several degrees C!

September 22, 2016 1:23 pm

SMC said “A great deal. They’ll create a threat, just to be able to combat it.” Just what the Pentagon did during the cold war. It is called threat escalation!

n.n
September 22, 2016 1:33 pm

A reasonable response to mitigate a known risk is worthwhile. However, Obama wants people to address the prophecy of catastrophic anthropogenic global warming, which is not a scientifically valid concept in our chaotic and semi-stable system where human causality is not a global driver.
Obama and Clinton would do better to address the millions of victims annually of his Pro-Choice quasi-religion, [class] diversity schemes (e.g. racism), progressive wars (i.e. social justice adventurism), trickle-up poverty (e.g. redistributive change), anti-native policies (e.g. refugee crises, mass emigration), etc.
It’s not science and it’s not for the children (i.e. our Posterity).

DMA
September 22, 2016 1:45 pm

“President Obama is asking 20 federal offices to work together on a national security strategy to address climate change.”
The first step in addressing a problem is to assess the problem. If this step is not bypassed the problem will be seen for what it is.
The next step is to asses possible actions to alleviate the problem. If step one if carried out reasonably step two becomes moot.
The next step is to develop steps to protect against unforeseen complications. If step one is carried out reasonably and step two is moot, step three can be seen as defense.and common sense.

TA
Reply to  DMA
September 22, 2016 2:47 pm

“The first step in addressing a problem is to assess the problem.”
I wonder if any of them will figure out there is no problem to address? Probably not, if they have to deliver the report to Obama before he leaves Office. They know the result Obama wants and they will give it to him. That’s what bureaucrats do.

hunter
September 22, 2016 2:15 pm

At least Nero had musical talent. And that a talentless Evita may succeed the current lunatic is a cruel joke.

Alan Robertson
Reply to  hunter
September 22, 2016 2:35 pm

Talentless Evita?
How about “screeching harridan”?

noaaprogrammer
Reply to  Alan Robertson
September 22, 2016 9:45 pm

… a real tourettey betty!

Alan Robertson
September 22, 2016 2:28 pm

Obama’s move is designed to give the climate fearmongers another talking point. Previously, Obama ordered the military chiefs to come up with similar climate action plans and since that time, there has been no end to the wailing: “See, the military thought climate change is such a big scary deal that they made an action plan.”

DonM
September 22, 2016 2:33 pm

… “ parts of the United States that are threatened by climate change over the next three decades.”
How may States did Obama say there were? 57?
I am sure that the CIA and the NSA could utilize a very large budget increase to protect those parts of the United States that encompass those other seven States.

September 22, 2016 3:17 pm

Unfortunately the US is becoming like all the other countries in the world. One war after another, permanent enemies, ethic and racial problems, and made up problems. To name a few. Some can say, better than most places, and I’d say, not even a minimum of what it should be. It’s like watching someone with a sickness get sicker every day. And every thing they do makes it worse.

Hunterandgatherer
September 22, 2016 3:23 pm

Just wondering what people here think of the report (just released) written by the National Intelligence Council, which starts off by saying, “Long-term changes in climate will produce more extreme weather events and put greater stress on critical Earth systems like oceans, freshwater, and biodiversity. These in turn will almost certainly have significant effects, both direct and indirect, across social, economic, political, and security realms during the next 20 years.”

Pat Frank
Reply to  Hunterandgatherer
September 22, 2016 6:32 pm

Presuming they mean “changes in climate” due to increasing GHG emissions, then given all the evidence compiled on this site, and further given my own work, my thoroughly considered view is that they ought to be renamed the National Incompetence Council. One suspects that most here would agree.

KenW
September 22, 2016 3:56 pm

“How does the CIA, the NSA, and all the other agencies in the bottomless government agency alphabet soup respond to a demand that they plan for combatting climate change? ”
Easy: add more workers……

Gordon Dressler
Reply to  KenW
September 24, 2016 10:13 pm

Rumor of a Gaia bomb in the works . . . very hush-hush, of course.
After it’s set off, no one will ever worry about climate change again.

Michael Jankowski
September 22, 2016 3:59 pm

FBI and CIA to fight climate change, NASA tasked with Muslim outreach. Maybe Nero could make sense of it.

Jack
September 22, 2016 4:07 pm

This is as crazy as the old Mad Magazine Spy versus Spy.
Or is he using climate to hide what he is doing on another front. Remember he has ordered that FBI hold no records of IS suspects.

Johann Wundersamer
September 22, 2016 4:22 pm

Taken together, Deese said, “this is a very significant step and one that I think is a culmination of an elevation of the intersection between national security and climate change.”
___________________________________
By the way – how many troops has the vatican.

Hocus Locus
September 22, 2016 5:30 pm

Obama’s conflation of Climate Change directives into a National Security threat is a contorted master plan shove them into the Department of Homeland Security, like a forgotten rectal thermometer.
It is hoped that once they elongate and become entwined within the blubbery entrails of that organization, a future sitting president would require eight years and considerable strain to purge them.

Marcus
September 22, 2016 7:05 pm

..How much more proof do you need to see that the liberal left simply does not live in the real world ? Trump is America’s last hope !

willhaas
September 22, 2016 8:17 pm

The reality is that the climate change we have been experiencing is caused by the sun and the oceans over which Mankind has no control. There is no real evidence that CO2 has any effect on climate and plenty of scientific rationale to support the idea that the climate sensitivity of CO2 is really zero. The relevant government agencies should be conserving their applicable resources until the time when science finds a way that Mankind can some how intimidate the sun and the oceans to provide the optimum climate. They have yet to define the ideal climate let alone come up with a means for achieving it. So far the current interglacial period has been cooler than the previous one with lower sea levels and less ice cap melting yet CO2 levels are higher than they were during the Eemian. The current interglacial period will not go on forever and no one knows how to avoid the next ice age. I doubt that bankrupting the government will help the situation any.

Patrick MJD
September 22, 2016 8:31 pm

There was a documentary on free to air TV here in Australia about his 8 years in the top job. He was portrayed as the greatest PotUS evah! That does not seem to be reflected by many American posties here at WUWT, quite the opposite in fact.

gnomish
September 22, 2016 10:27 pm

bread and circus without all the bread! hey hey it’s the world tour of the cirque bien pensant!
the globalist ringmasters arranged a nobel prize as part of the promotion.
does anybody remember The Monkees?
they were 4 unknown young men with long hair who were hired to pretend they were musicians in a band.
obama was the first truly global presidential monkee.
you think they can’t tax the sun? just you wait!
wanna see me pull a habit out of a rat?

Griff
Reply to  gnomish
September 23, 2016 8:01 am

“day dream believer…”

Roy
September 23, 2016 1:40 am

Since climate models don’t work what is wrong with asking the CIA to find out what is happening by spying on Gaia?

Griff
September 23, 2016 2:00 am

you’ll be pleased to hear then that the CIA – which thinks this is a real threat to US security – has been working on this for quite some time: shouldn’t have to put any additional effort in to achieve this…
https://www.cia.gov/news-information/press-releases-statements/center-on-climate-change-and-national-security.html
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/10/science/earth/climate-change-report-outlines-perils-for-us-military.html?_r=0
“Climate change is accelerating, and it will place unparalleled strains on American military and intelligence agencies in coming years by causing ever more disruptive events around the globe, the nation’s top scientific research group said… The group, the National Research Council, says in a study commissioned by the C.I.A. and other intelligence agencies…”
http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/cnsnewscom-staff/cia-director-cites-impact-climate-change-deeper-cause-global
“CIA director cites impact of climate change as deeper cause of global instability”

Krudd Gillard of the Commondebt of Australia
Reply to  Griff
September 23, 2016 3:26 am

OMG, the CIA are now doing media releases of their most important work.

Griff
Reply to  Krudd Gillard of the Commondebt of Australia
September 23, 2016 8:00 am

UK’s MI6 have a website…
https://www.sis.gov.uk/

Patrick MJD
Reply to  Griff
September 24, 2016 5:14 am

The CIA, as known now, was called summat else in 1948, do you know that Griff? Caused a bit of a “problem”.

phaedo
September 23, 2016 2:42 am

A new epoch should be declared, the Elithiocene.

Paul Coppin
Reply to  phaedo
September 23, 2016 1:05 pm

Better: the Obscene….

RBom
September 23, 2016 7:32 pm

Obamassic. Ha ha
Only 4 months to go and Big O will be gone.

Gordon Dressler
September 24, 2016 10:02 pm

Well, why not issue such an order when you haven’t learned the lesson(s) of history. Congress tried such a move back in 2015. “The Senate Appropriations Committee requested the report in conjunction with the Defense Appropriations Act for Fiscal Year 2015, asking that the undersecretary of defense for policy provide a report that identifies the most serious and likely climate-related security risks for each combatant command and the ways those commands integrate risk mitigation into their planning processes.”
Here’s a link to the press release announcing release of this report to Congress, from which the above quote was extracted:
http://www.defense.gov/News/Article/Article/612710
and here’s a link to DoD’s full report titled “NATIONAL SECURITY IMPLICATIONS OF CLIMATE-RELATED
RISKS AND A CHANGING CLIMATE”:
http://archive.defense.gov/pubs/150724-congressional-report-on-national-implications-of-climate-change.pdf?source=govdelivery
Somewhat surprisingly, DoD didn’t go along with game fully, only in name. Kudos to them for saving US taxpayers $millions, if not hundreds of $million, by not creating additional useless paper in their response.
The full report from DoD is all of 14 (!) pages long, and on the very first page (Page 1) states “The estimated cost of this report or study for the Department of Defense is approximately $22,000 for the 2015 Fiscal Year. This includes $0 in expenses and $22,000 in DoD labor.” And how does DoD discuss the “in-depth study” they performed to determine if climate change (get that . . . not even referencing man-caused global climate change) is something amenable to human intervention? . . . they simply state: “DoD recognizes the reality of climate change and the significant risk it poses to U.S. interests globally.” So, for 14 pages, $22,000 and statements like this, the subject document did little more than allow a box to be checked in some controlling bureaucracy’s list of things to do.
The 20 federal offices that Obama tasked with writing “implementation plans for combatting climate change” could do worse that simply stating “If the climate gets warmer over the next 20 years (say by +0.5 deg-C), we will adapt our dress attire, operational infrastructure and procedures, and budgets as required by rational threat assessments. If the climate gets significantly colder over the next 20 years (say by -0.5 deg-C) we will adapt our dress attire, operational infrastructure and procedures, and yearly budget requests as required by rational threat assessments.”
Alternatively, these 20 offices could jointly develop some backbone by simply responding, “Based on the best scientific data available, we have no f***ing idea how to COMBAT climate change.”
If you issue a stupid order, don’t be surprised if you get a stupid response.

%d bloggers like this: