U.S. Navy “Taking Climate Change Seriously,” Despite Trump… Because Guam!

Guest ridicule by David Middleton

What’s missing from this article?

Trump’s skepticism aside, the Navy is taking climate change seriously

Gerald Harris, Medill News Service June 28, 2018

TAMUNING, Guam — The Trump administration has vigorously downplayed the threat of global warming, insisting that the science is still unproven.

But an increase in the number of severe storms combined with rising sea levels and surface temperatures are forcing the U.S. Navy to adjust to the mounting threat of climate change.

The 2018 National Defense Authorization Act has ordered the Pentagon to identify the top 10 military bases threatened by climate change for the Navy and the other service branches by November.


While the Navy has a long history of responding to weather-related catastrophes, a world-wide increase in extreme weather and climate-related civilian unrest has led to more requests for assistance from the Navy.

The demand could hamper naval readiness, said Ann C. Phillips, a retired rear admiral who spent 30 years in the Navy and is now a member of the advisory board of the Center for Climate & Security, a non-partisan think tank.


“By reputation Guam has the largest fuel capacity than any place in Asia, largest weapon capacity, so Guam is the base which the United States can project its power to this part of the world without asking anyone’s permission,” said Robert Underwood, the outgoing president of the University of Guam and a former Guam delegate to the U.S. House of Representatives.


According to Austin Shelton, an assistant professor at the University of Guam and director of the Sea Grant research program, Guam is facing multiple challenges.


According to a report by the Center for Climate & Security released earlier this year, 200 military installations participating in a vulnerability assessment have already been affected by storm surge flooding.

A 2008 assessment found that only 30 military sites faced elevated risks because of sea level rise.

USA Today

The article doesn’t cite a single U.S. Navy source.  It cites:

  • A retired Rear Admiral who works for the Center for Climate & Security.
  • The Center for Climate & Security, a warmunist activist group.
  • The “outgoing president of the University of Guam and a former Guam delegate to the U.S. House of Representatives,” a liberal Democrat.
  • An “assistant professor at the University of Guam and director of the Sea Grant research program.”

I’m surprised they didn’t cite the world-renowned Guam expert, Rep. Hank Johnson (D-GA)…

The article exhibits the standard warmunist trait of mis-conjugating verbs and making unsupported claims:

While the Navy has a long history of responding to weather-related catastrophes, a world-wide increase in extreme weather and climate-related civilian unrest has led to more requests for assistance from the Navy.

The demand could hamper naval readiness…

Unsupported claims:

Regarding the claim of a climate change driven increase in extreme weather, this is extreme horst (h/t Clyde Spencer) schist.

Contiguous U.S. Climate Extremes Index. No trend, R² = 0.0367. From 1910-1940, three years exceeded +2σ. From 1998-2017, five years exceeded +2σ. From 1941-1997, the CEI was mostly below average. (NOAA)

Compo et al., 2011 found no evidence “of an intensifying weather trend” during the 20th century.

Some surprising results are already evident. For instance, the long-term trends of indices representing the North Atlantic Oscillation, the tropical Pacific Walker Circulation, and the Pacific–North American pattern are weak or non-existent over the full period of record. The long-term trends of zonally averaged precipitation minus evaporation also differ in character from those in climate model simulations of the twentieth century.

Compo et all. 2011

“Some surprising results are already evident. For instance, the long-term trends of indices representing the North Atlantic Oscillation, the tropical Pacific Walker Circulation, and the Pacific–North American pattern are weak or non-existent over the full period of record. The long-term trends of zonally averaged precipitation minus evaporation also differ in character from those in climate model simulations of the twentieth century.” Compo et al., 2011

The Weather Isn’t Getting Weirder

The latest research belies the idea that storms are getting more extreme.

By Anne Jolis
Updated Feb. 10, 2011 12:01 a.m. ET
Last week a severe storm froze Dallas under a sheet of ice, just in time to disrupt the plans of the tens of thousands of (American) football fans descending on the city for the Super Bowl. On the other side of the globe, Cyclone Yasi slammed northeastern Australia, destroying homes and crops and displacing hundreds of thousands of people.

Some climate alarmists would have us believe that these storms are yet another baleful consequence of man-made CO2 emissions.


As it happens, the project’s initial findings, published last month, show no evidence of an intensifying weather trend. “In the climate models, the extremes get more extreme as we move into a doubled CO2 world in 100 years,” atmospheric scientist Gilbert Compo, one of the researchers on the project, tells me from his office at the University of Colorado, Boulder. “So we were surprised that none of the three major indices of climate variability that we used show a trend of increased circulation going back to 1871.”

In other words, researchers have yet to find evidence of more-extreme weather patterns over the period, contrary to what the models predict. “There’s no data-driven answer yet to the question of how human activity has affected extreme weather,” adds Roger Pielke Jr., another University of Colorado climate researcher.


Regarding the idiotic claim that the U.S. Navy’s operational readiness is being affected by Gorebal Warming… This is unmitigated bull schist!

December 14, 2017

A New Report Reveals Why the U.S. Navy Is in Big Trouble (And Offers a Solution)

Over the years, due to a brutal operations tempo and a shrinking fleet, the Navy has reached the breaking point.

by Dave Majumdar

he United States Navy has released its new Strategic Readiness Review (SSR), which was ordered by Navy Secretary Richard Spencer earlier this year in September. The SSR, as was expected, has revealed severe deficits in the U.S. Navy’s readiness level, which have led to a rash of accidents in recent month.

“The U.S. Navy is without question the most capable in the world but its primacy is being challenged as it sails into a security environment not seen since before the collapse of the Soviet Union,” the SSR reads. “Another era of sustained peer-on-peer competition has arrived and failing to recognize and prepare for its very different challenges will have severe consequences. Even in a non-peer-on-peer environment, the Navy and the nation can ill afford the readiness deficiencies revealed in the recent ship-handling incidents in the Pacific.”

Over the years, due to a brutal operations tempo and a shrinking fleet, the Navy has reached the breaking point. “Many of these deficiencies have been observed and authoritatively documented for years, however the naval capacity that had been built up for the Cold War masked their impact,” the report reads. “That past margin in ships, aircraft, and sailors enabled the Navy to make mitigating adjustments in fleet operations, training, maintenance, and funding to accomplish assigned missions. Today, those margins are long gone. A smaller fleet with fewer sailors is straining to meet the operational demands placed upon it.”


The National Interest

The U.S. Navy is stretched very thin protecting the national interests of these United States.  Since the end of Cold War I, the Navy has had to manage a “shrinking fleet” and a steady, if not expanding, operational tempo.  Note that neither “weather” nor “climate” is mentioned in the article.  Nor are they mentioned in the report.  This is the closest that the report got to climate change:

To define what each service provides, the service chiefs and the joint staff review and validate force requests (the demand) from the geographic combatant commanders and prioritize them for consideration. The output of this process is a recommendation to the Secretary of Defense regarding which naval assets will be made available to each geographic combatant commander (the supply). This Global Force Management Allocation Plan is reviewed quarterly and when unplanned requirements arise.13 These unplanned requirements can be in response to threat increases in theater, natural disasters, or changes in force availability. When one of these emergent requirements arises, a geographic combatant commander submits a Request for Forces.

Responding to requests for forces pressurizes the fleet, as it requires either diverting another ready unit that may be in line for another assignment or disrupting the maintenance and/or training phases of a unit not deemed ready in accordance with established Navy standards. Some Requests for Forces can be accommodated without disruption to near and long-term readiness by using only those units that are certified ready to deploy. However, the small fleet and the need for specific unit capabilities frequently limit the options to answer emergent mission requirements. For instance, in the case of hurricane relief, amphibious capability and helicopter capacity are likely to be the limiting functions; on the other hand, certain high end threats might require ballistic missile defense capable ships.

Strategic Readiness Review 2017

No schist Sherlock.  Hurricane relief missions call for Gators & helo’s rather than Aegis-equipped DDG’s & CG’s.

One would think that if the the Navy was facing increasing demands for Gorebal Warming-related assistance, in might just have made it into a report on readiness challenges.

Mis-conjugated verbs

  • The unsupported claims *have* led to more demand for assistance from the Navy.
  • The increased demand *could* hamper naval readiness in the future.

If the Navy has faced more demand for Gorebal Warming relief missions, then any effect on readiness would have already occurred.

  • A future demand could affect readiness.
  • A demand that has already occurred would have affected readiness.

I think the author is making the common mistake of conflating model-based predictions with things that are happening or have already happened.

That said, the Navy should take climate change more seriously

Climate Change Weather Disables US Navy’s Newest Ship! (WUWT)


0 0 votes
Article Rating
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
June 29, 2018 12:18 pm

Well, there is the ongoing problem of subsidence in the Norfolk/Portsmouth/Newport News area, but this is not weather related at all. It is because of the tremendous load of construction over soft sediments already sinking…. The entire east coast of the US is slowly subsiding and has been since the beginning of the Holocene.

Reply to  Pameladragon
June 29, 2018 2:09 pm

You’re right, Pamela, that the Chesapeake is sinking (subsiding) due to the geology there, and most of the apparent sea-level rise there is not due to global sea-level change.

Here’s my page for Sewells Point, VA (Norfolk / Hampton Rhodes), showing sea-level juxtaposed with CO2 level:

Here’s NOAA’s page for Sewells Point, VA:

The geology there is very unusual. Google “Chesapeake bolide” for some interesting reading.

My guess is that two-thirds of the local “sea-level rise” there (about 3 mm/yr) is actually subsidence. SONEL says that nearby Portsmouth Naval Yard experiences 2.03 ±0.39 mm/year subsidence, but that’s based on a very short measurement record at a slightly different location, a bit farther from the bolide impact site.

Phil R
Reply to  David Middleton
June 29, 2018 4:27 pm

Dang, my comment above should have gone below. 🙁

Phil R
Reply to  David Middleton
June 29, 2018 4:31 pm

By the way, another good reference.


One of the authors is a geologist for the state of Virginia and has logged a couple wells of mine on the Eastern shore and farther west in Newport News.

Phil R
Reply to  Dave Burton
June 29, 2018 4:26 pm

David Middleton,

Not to disagree with you because that is a very good summary (and I live above it, close to the two wells on the left), but the Suffolk scarp is a paleoshoreline formed during the Pleistocene when sea levels were much higher than now, and the shores were further west. I think you’re right that the Suffolk scarp coincides with the western margin of the crater and the height of the scarp may have been enhanced by land subsidance, but the scarp is much younger than the crater.

Reply to  Pameladragon
June 29, 2018 5:01 pm

The end is near. Lets see, I am 36 feet above sea level inland from Boston. That is 10,972 mm above sea level or so. At a rate of 1.4mm per year I have only 7,837 years left before I have ocean front property. I am doomed I tell you, doomed.

Reply to  Pameladragon
June 30, 2018 4:25 am

Could some of you PLEASE go tell Accuweather that their article on “rising seas threatening 13,000 miles of US coastline” is hooey?
It’s bad enough that their forecasts are only accurate for the day or two before, but their addiction to crisis warming is laughable.

Reply to  Pameladragon
June 30, 2018 5:33 am

As sea level continues to rise, the oceans are getting larger and larger. Of course the navy needs more ships!! 🙂

Justin McCarthy
Reply to  Bill_W_1984
June 30, 2018 6:22 pm

If ships are getting bigger won’t they displace more water contributing to sea rise????

Chuck in Houston
Reply to  Justin McCarthy
July 3, 2018 12:42 pm

Good point Justin. A couple more Gerald R Ford class carriers and it’ll be like the hot tub overflowing when my father in law gets in.

June 29, 2018 12:21 pm

I think I have it. Global warming caused the election of Barack Obama, which led to a drawdown of the Navy’s reserve capacity, so global warming is responsible./sarc

Joel Snider
Reply to  Tom Halla
June 29, 2018 12:25 pm

There’s also eight years of Obama pressure on the higher-ups in the military, as well as their scientific advisers.

J Mac
Reply to  Joel Snider
June 29, 2018 1:52 pm

It was more than just ‘pressure’…. It was a deliberate putsch!

Reply to  Joel Snider
June 29, 2018 6:26 pm

Also the insanity about “diversity” at any cost. The collision with the cargo ship was apparently caused by the concerted incompetence of three females.

NOTE – the problem was not females in those positions. It was females held to lower standards of competence in those positions. It doesn’t matter whether the reason for lowering the standards is because a person is a female (or some other “diversity” enhancer), or because the person is the son of an Admiral – you are sailing into dangerous waters.

Reply to  Writing Observer
June 30, 2018 4:31 am

Writing Observer: There were also MALE officers involved in that, including a MALE CO who was asleep when he should have been on deck. Do NOT blame it all on women.

Put the blame where it belongs – sloppy training and poor executive skills and an 8-year term of SJW hogwash being more important that running a military operation, thanks to Ray Mabus, who did as much damage as he possibly could to the Navy before he was dismissed from SECNAV.

Kalifornia Kook
Reply to  Sara
June 30, 2018 11:51 am

Sara – Not blamed on women – it was blamed on not requiring demonstration of the appropriate skills as is required of their male counterparts, but still given the positions and authority. The rush to show women in those positions outweighed the need to have qualified personnel in those positions. That was not the fault of the women involved, and a couple of (male) admirals and the CO were rightly punished for it. They put politics, optics, etc. ahead of quality.

But if they hadn’t been women, they wouldn’t have been in the positions that led to the deaths of seven sailors. It is a fine point.

Justin McCarthy
Reply to  Kalifornia Kook
June 30, 2018 6:26 pm

It is the CO’s duty to ensure that his crew is sea worthy notwithstanding how well or how badly they may have been trained in basic, advanced training etc. Works that way in the Army, Marines, Air Force and Navy. We lose that standard; we lose everything.

June 29, 2018 12:23 pm

So, the navy is stressed by too much work and not enough resources. It’s obvious that the thing to do is distract them by making them also plan for climate change. It’s like smashing your hand with a hammer to distract yourself from a headache.

June 29, 2018 12:29 pm

Under Obama, officers had to salute and say, yes, sir, fighting climate change in Mission #1 for the US Navy. You didn’t get promoted, otherwise. Biodiesel, yes, sir!

Now, not so much.

June 29, 2018 12:31 pm

The late, great Father of Climatology, Reid Bryson, as a naval met officer in WWII, twice warned ADM Halsey that a typhoon was coming, and twice was ignored.

He famously said, “You can spit on the sidewalk and have more effect on climate than CO2”.

Reply to  David Middleton
June 29, 2018 12:43 pm

Yup. And yet, Halsey was not only not relieved, but awarded a fourth star.

Reply to  David Middleton
June 29, 2018 12:57 pm

I don’t think that Spruance ever made a bad command decision.

Yes, thank God that Bull wasn’t in command at Midway.

Many lives on light carrier Monterey were saved by Lt. Gerald Ford, who courageously fought and finally put out a fire during the terrible Dec 1944 typhoon.

Reply to  Felix
June 29, 2018 1:22 pm

“I don’t think that Spruance ever made a bad command decision.”

The same might well be said about Nimitz. The USN was incredibly lucky with respect to the high command in the Pacific, even though Halsey tended to be both too impulsive and stubborn.

Reply to  tty
June 29, 2018 1:27 pm

The allies were indeed lucky to have two such great admirals. It could easily have been worse, and almost was.

Halsey’s contribution was very early in the war, before June 1942. After that, it would have been better had he been on permanent sick leave. To his credit, however, he did recommend to call off the Peliliu landing.

IMO Nimitz’ worst decision was to go ahead with the invasion of Peleliu. Many Marines died needlessly.

Javert Chip
Reply to  Felix
June 29, 2018 3:24 pm

Halsey strongly contributed to the survival of USMC at Guadalcanal.

Mike the Morlock
Reply to  David Middleton
June 29, 2018 8:27 pm

Hi David.
We were very lucky at Midway, IJN CA Tone had been late in getting its search plane off, which was the aircraft that was to cover the area the USN was approaching on . The American strike was uncoordinated, the Torpedo plane squadrons attacking on their own. Of course the Japanese chasing the remnants left their CVs wide open.
How Halsey would have handled things is of course open. Though he was cautious during the Doolittle raid launching early.
I would venture that we were lucky to have the talent that we had in all our admirals. Each had their strengths and weakness. Swapping them around for operations also helped, improve their skill level and possibly confusing the Japanese.
We won they lost. We could build ships faster and more of them, on both coasts and the interior river system.
Magic also helped.
I mean the code breaking.


Reply to  David Middleton
June 30, 2018 6:25 pm

One dive-bomber squadron got lost on the way to their target, corrected course, and came up on the Japanese fleet right when most of the IJN planes were refueling. Their raid became a chicken shoot that IIRC sank at least one of the IJN carriers with nearly all of its planes onboard.

Reply to  drednicolson
June 30, 2018 6:34 pm

And when the Zero fighters were down on the deck massacring the out of date level bombers, with their execrable torpedoes.

Enterprise CAG McClusky followed an IJN destroyer to find the carriers. A great leader.

Two SBD squadrons from Enterprise (VB-6 and VS-6) attacked together, wreaking such havoc as never before known in the annals of naval warfare by single individuals. The heaviest blow ever struck in war by a warrior’s own hand and eye was by Dick Best, whose bomb destroyed Akagi.

At first, both squadrons dived on carrier Kaga. Best’s squadron followed McClusky, against doctrine. Best and his two wingmen broke off to attack Akagi. His two comrades missed, but Best’s bomb hit home. Both carriers were left floating infernos.

Reply to  David Middleton
June 29, 2018 4:17 pm

Oh, and I would also lay Halsey running off after Osawa’s bait partly on Nimitz also. It was Nimitz’s responsibility to make the roles of each command clear or to designate an over all commander afloat for the Leyte operation. The simple fact is that Halsey was allowed the latitude to run off because of the ambiguity of the orders he received from CINCPAC and his failure to designate an over all Naval commander afloat for the operation who Halsey and the others would report to.

Reply to  David Middleton
June 29, 2018 9:34 pm

FDR’s buddy Leahy also made five-star, despite being CNO during the time that our execrable torpedoes were developed without adequate testing.

Had our torpedoes worked in 1941, the Japanese would never have been able to land on the Philippines. Our subs would have sunk their troop transports. Imagine the frustration of sub commanders.

Yet King refused to believe their reports, so that our problems persisted far longer into the war than need be.

Criminal incompetence and negligence.

Tom Abbott
Reply to  Felix
June 30, 2018 6:40 am

The history of U.S. submarines in the World War II Pacific Ocean is fascinating.

Reply to  David Middleton
June 30, 2018 6:44 pm

USS Harder bagged five Kaiboken (IJN destroyers) in five days in the sea lanes around the Phillipines. According to crew accounts, their captain was deliberately hunting them, which is kind of like scissors picking a fight with rock five times in a row, and winning every time.

The IJN high command thought a whole wolf-pack of American subs were in that area and ordered a pull-back into the Phillipine Sea as a defensive measure. Which contributed to the Battle of the Phillipine Sea being such a rout for the Allies.

michael Ozanne
Reply to  David Middleton
July 1, 2018 3:55 am

“Don’t forget Ernest King… IIRC he hand-picked Nimitz to take over the Pacific Fleet after Kimmel was fired.”

Some of King’s decisions in the Atlantic theatre were tantamount to treason.

Reply to  tty
June 29, 2018 4:05 pm

Ghormely was a bad decision. One that Nimitz corrected despite the man being a close friend.

Reply to  David Middleton
June 29, 2018 3:15 pm

You guys know way too much.


Reply to  HotScot
June 29, 2018 4:26 pm

HotScot. WW II in your part of the world was a necessity for the US. WW II in the Pacific for the US was a necessity but it was also about vengeance with a capital V! It as not Hitler that awoke the sleeping Giant, it was Nippon.

Reply to  David Middleton
June 29, 2018 4:01 pm

Halsey was the right man at the right time during the campaign to save Guadalcanal and advance up the Solomons. It should never be forgotten that during that time the US Navy took part in the most intense series of major surface actions it ever has in it’s history. And Halsey succeeded despite being up against superior numbers in every major class of warship. So despite questionable command decisions later, Halsey deserves to be on the list IMO.

And also don’t forget about Marc Mitscher. IMO he belongs on that list of great Admirals for his actions during the central Pacific campaign. He did very well in a tough situation during the invasion of the Marianas.

I would add COMSUBPAC Charles Lockwood to that list of great Admirals in the Pacific Fleet also. After all under his leadership his subs sank more enemy tonnage than the elements under any other command subordinate to CINCPAC during WW II. It was his initiative that drove the torpedo exploder and stability problems to be fully investigated and resolved. (Torpedo problems continued to some extent throughout the war but were a result of the difficulties of mass producing a complex machine that had always before been virtually hand made and not a matter of design or engineering flaws not detected due to lack of testing as was the problem for the first two years of the war.)

Tom Abbott
Reply to  RAH
June 29, 2018 5:17 pm

“It should never be forgotten that during that time the US Navy took part in the most intense series of major surface actions it ever has in it’s history.”

The USS Samuel B. Roberts comes to mind:


“USS Samuel B. Roberts (DE-413) was a John C. Butler-class destroyer escort of the United States Navy.

Samuel B. Roberts participated in the Battle off Samar, an unlikely victory in which a relatively small force of U.S. warships prevented a vastly superior Japanese force from attacking the amphibious invasion fleet off the large Philippine island of Leyte. This destroyer escort, along with the handful of destroyers, destroyer escorts, and escort carriers of the unit called “Taffy 3”, was inadvertently left alone to fend off a fleet of heavily armed Japanese battleships, cruisers, and destroyers in this crucial action off the Island of Samar, during the Battle of Leyte Gulf of October 1944. Steaming aggressively through a gauntlet of incoming shells, Samuel B. Roberts scored one torpedo hit and numerous gunfire hits as she slugged it out with larger enemy warships before finally being sunk. After the battle, Samuel B. Roberts received the appellation “the destroyer escort that fought like a battleship.”[2]”

end excerpt

The Fightin’ Sammy B and the other destroyers and destroyer escorts did not have guns powerful enough to pentrate the armor of the Japanese battleships and cruisers but they inflicted so much damage on the superstructure of the Japanese ships that the Japanese commander finally decided to withdraw.

The big Japanese guns were designed to fight off similar heavily armored ships and their large shells were designed to penetrate thick armor before exploding but when they fired these shells at the thinly armored American ships, the shells just passed right through from one side to the other and most did not explode inside the ships, they just knocked big holes in the ships, which allowed the American ships to continue in the fight.

One gunner on one of the DE’s was said to have been observed still working his gun and firing at the enemy as his ship sunk beneath the waves.

That’s the American fighting spirit.

Reply to  Tom Abbott
June 29, 2018 5:31 pm

I read somewhere that as the American ships got close the Japanese fleet, their big guns could no longer depress enough to fire at the Americans. From that point on it was a battle of deck guns.

Reply to  Tom Abbott
June 29, 2018 5:51 pm

The pure valor of the DDs and DEs of Taffy 3 at Leyte is legendary. But the actions I was talking about were earlier in the war for Guadalcanal in the slot and “Iron bottom” sound and other places around island. Those were the most intense series of surface actions the US Navy ever fought.

The major actions under Ghormley were:
Battle of Savo Island
Battle of the Eastern Solomons
Battle of Cape Esperance

Under Halsey:
Battle of the Santa Cruz Islands
Naval Battle of Guadalcanal
Battle of Tassafaronga

But those were just the major battles. Night after night there were surface actions as the US sought to interdict the reinforcement and resupply efforts of the Tokyo Express usually under the command of indomitable Raizo Tanaka.

Halsey succinctly expressed what it all meant when he said:

“Before Guadalcanal the enemy advanced at his pleasure – after Guadalcanal he retreated at ours.”

R. Shearer
Reply to  Tom Abbott
June 29, 2018 8:41 pm

It’s interesting to read this here. I wouldn’t be alive if my father hadn’t survived those battles at Leyte, Samar and others.

J Mac
Reply to  RAH
June 29, 2018 5:41 pm

Agree! The heroism demonstrated by the ‘Sammy B’ and other light destroyers in the battle of Samar makes my skin prickle each time I hear mention of it! ‘Home of the Brave!’, indeed!

Reply to  RAH
June 29, 2018 9:40 pm

I’ll grant you that Halsey was preferable to Ghormley. But who wouldn’t have been?

Reply to  Felix
June 30, 2018 4:11 am


It seems to me you hold Nimitz and King and their decisions and judgments in high regard. And yet you censure Halsey despite the fact that both Nimitz and King had to sign off on his assignments and promotions. Think about that.

It is easy for us to sit back and pass judgment having what we think is all the information. But judging things like the command in combat during past actions is not like Monday morning quarterbacking. We don’t have the instant replay and multiple camera angles. What most of us base our judgments on are narratives by historians who supposedly used original sourced records and accounts. Narratives which over time have been built upon those that came before until certain claims of what happened and why are as set as if they have been written in stone.

I tend to give Commaders the benifit of the doubt for their decisions unless I’m darn sure they deserve censure. One always has to remember we’re dealing with people here. Sometimes people who survived who had axes to grind or who wish to embellish their own actions in their descriptions of what happened, but more often than not people whose own perspective was limited at the time. And then there is the fog of war. One will find when reading personal accounts of combatants in a given action that often the accounts conflict not only in details but in over all impressions even though those giving the accounts were located physically very close to each other at the time the event they are describing occured.

In other cases records, even official ones from the time, or supposedly compiled from original source data, are just plain wrong. An example of that would be the JANAC (Joint Army-Navy Assessment Committee) report concerning the section of records of sinkings by individual submarines in the Pacific during WW II. In many instances it bears little resemblence to the records of sinkings by individual subs based the Subs actual combat reports. In part this due to the fact that the officers doing the JANAC had no access to the still top secret Ultra information, and in part because Japanese records were missing, incomplete, or in error. But in large part reconstructing what really happened, what particular ship was sunk by which particular submarine was well nigh an impossible task in many cases. And yet JANAC published in 1947 became the official US Navy record for US submarine sinkings in the Pacific for decades and was used in many histories.

Reply to  RAH
June 30, 2018 12:46 pm

I don’t hold King in high regard, and pointed out Nimitz’ error.

The fact is that at the time, Halsey was being considered for removal, due to his terrible mistakes at Leyte and with the typhoons. So it’s not hindsight.

Reply to  Felix
June 30, 2018 6:45 pm

Yea, that’s why they gave him a 4th star.

Reply to  RAH
June 30, 2018 6:48 pm

Only Nimitz deserved a fifth star. The others got it because the navy wanted to equal the army.

Halsey should have been sacked, and would have been had the war continued.

Chuck in Houston
Reply to  David Middleton
July 3, 2018 12:51 pm

In Harms Way. Much better in my opinion. Dated but I’d rather watch it.

Reply to  Felix
June 30, 2018 12:57 am

Bryson also famously said the planet was going to cool. That one didn’t quite work out like he said.

Joe - the non climate scientists
Reply to  Felix
June 30, 2018 12:41 pm

The pacific War – is off topic – but at least it is a substantive discussion as compared to AGW and rising sea levels.

As someone else said – spitting into the ocean causing a greater rise in sea level that co2

June 29, 2018 12:33 pm

The Navy found an uptapped source of money….they get a free up grade

Dr. Dave
June 29, 2018 12:35 pm

Ah, Hank Johnson… the gift that keeps on giving. It’s hard to believe anyone can be that stupid.

If you haven’t seen the video linked above, do so immediately. It will definitely be one of the funniest things you’ve ever seen. Again, it’s hard to believe anyone is that stupid!!!

Reply to  Dr. Dave
June 29, 2018 12:45 pm

Apparently he was serious.

Dr. Dave
Reply to  Felix
June 29, 2018 1:38 pm

That’s what makes it so funny! To quote Bugs Bunny… “what a maroon.”

Reply to  Dr. Dave
June 29, 2018 9:31 pm

The most amazing thing is that old Hank was the UPGRADE. He was the sane and sober candidate who replaced Cynthia McKinney, because she was too crazy even for Georgia’s 4th congressional district, which I think must have been specially gerrymandered to contain all of the funny farms in the Peach State.

Reply to  Dr. Dave
June 30, 2018 7:39 am

I’ve always enjoyed the “maroon” line and have joked about it.
One can see Mel Blanc at a studio Session throwing out the line.
Just a guess of course, but fun.

Reply to  Dr. Dave
June 29, 2018 1:39 pm

not really…..Maxine Waters seems to have him beat

Reply to  Latitude
June 29, 2018 4:50 pm

Hank was funny though. Maxine is definitely not funny.

old construction worker
Reply to  Dr. Dave
June 29, 2018 5:03 pm

I don’t know how the officer kept it together. I would have been laughing.

Reply to  old construction worker
June 29, 2018 5:41 pm

At one point not shown in the video, he covers up a forming tear of laughter with a finger.

June 29, 2018 12:43 pm

People will generally believe anything they read that sort of aligns to their Confirmation Bias and the more times they hear it, it becomes eventually their default position without even checking any data themselves through laziness, disinterest or the government knows best.
The CAGW drumbeat seems to have been going for 30odd years more intensely after Global Cooling scares to AlGore(rythmns) Inconvenience Truth sounding the Warming scares from Hansen’s Work and now the ClimateChange which has occurred since an atmosphere existed word has given that side a brilliant word-bite hard to dispute.
Arguing over a few tenths of a degree like splitting hairs and which way an egg is put in its holder 🤣, we are in the middle of the ‘experiment’ so no way will we know in lifetimes what the conclusions if any are, if Humans who are the Earth become conscious, are responsible for minute changes in temperature; but it’s surely a good position if we really can, I like more heat please.
As a scientist I remain open minded and very pro-resource saving and ecological in my day to day approach. However money will override any conclusions for mankind who will likely continue to waste Earth. From the evidence I’ve seen CO2 is a minor order good photosynthesisizing gas and more is useful for the greening of our lovely Blue-Green 🌏.
H2O seems to do more to keep in warm with the other atmospheric contents helping us along with Earth’s Radiation from heat & radiactivity us from -270degC of space. Before the next coincidences of the 3 Milankovic cycles of which one is minimum now. Eventually all tectonic plates will subduct, so Humans if we last that long enjoy this paradise now 😇

R. Shearer
Reply to  CCB
June 30, 2018 6:28 am

And they measure and report temperature in hundredths of a degree and CO2 down to hundredths of a ppm and pretend like those measurements are real and significant.

In any case, on your last point, we do see some land being created and in places like Hawaii it supports like in short order. Life finds a way.

Clyde Spencer
June 29, 2018 12:49 pm

Shouldn’t that be “horst schist?’

June 29, 2018 12:55 pm

I think the number of countries where the US has military bases has doubled since 1990 or so. Even though there are fewer of them than before this time, they exist in more locations, which means probably in more diverse climate regions, which could cause a false concern over climate-change impact regionally, since there are MORE REGIONS to consider now.

Still, the US Navy would seem to be under the spell of the climate-alarm scam. Heightened popularization of climate alarm has infiltrated the military, possibly starting a vast waste of money in this sector too.

The disease keeps spreading.

Dave Anderson
June 29, 2018 1:10 pm

The navy has a growing problem running into other ships and the ground but that has nothing to do with the weather.

Doug Huffman
Reply to  Dave Anderson
June 29, 2018 1:19 pm

Leadership. Leadership at high levels, leadership at lower levels. Read Rickover on Responsibility, It is an unique concept …

Reply to  Doug Huffman
June 29, 2018 3:31 pm

Risk aversion is running so high it’s impairing day-to-day crew performance. Everyone wants plausible deniability should something go wrong, or at least to be able to spread the blame around and reduce their own culpability. Noone wants to take the initiative for fear of making a career-ending mistake. But in a crisis situation like an imminent collision, averting disaster demands initiative on the part of those who first notice it. Rarely is there enough time to check it out with a higher-up first.

James Beaver
Reply to  Doug Huffman
June 29, 2018 5:16 pm

Admiral Hymmn G. Rickover, the father of the U.S. nuclear Navy. I saw him once when he visited the sub I served on. He was quite the force of nature.

Sweet Old Bob
Reply to  James Beaver
June 29, 2018 6:33 pm

Rode us three times while I was aboard …ORSE under him was …different …. like a full scram from a flank bell …
we kept Tave in the green band … think he was impressed …

Chuck in Houston
Reply to  Sweet Old Bob
July 3, 2018 12:54 pm

Oh Lord. I can only imagine.

Harry Passfield
June 29, 2018 1:16 pm

Simple solution, if the US Navy bigwigs think sea levels will rise too far: build more submarines! They don’t care about sea level.

June 29, 2018 1:20 pm

I think the Rep. Hank Johnson reference was real! He did mention the cause of the tipping would be increased population and we all know about sex in a canoe…
comment image

R. Shearer
Reply to  Yirgach
June 29, 2018 3:08 pm

That’s like Coors beer!

R. Shearer
Reply to  David Middleton
June 29, 2018 3:57 pm

Close to it anyway. Tippecanoe, LOL.

Rich Davis
Reply to  David Middleton
June 29, 2018 4:47 pm

The Monty Python quote is “…close to water”

June 29, 2018 1:28 pm

Thank you. Watching the congressman was the funniest things I have seen in many a year.

R. Shearer
Reply to  Ozonebust
June 29, 2018 3:11 pm

Why, when sea level rises above the bow and sterns of ships, they’ll capsize just like Guam.

June 29, 2018 1:32 pm

Congress orders the military to do something, and that’s proof that the military takes global warming seriously.

Are these guys serious?

June 29, 2018 1:33 pm

“According to a report by the Center for Climate & Security released earlier this year, 200 military installations participating in a vulnerability assessment have already been affected by storm surge flooding.”

A port affected by storm surge flooding.
And in the entire history of the human race, this has never happened before????

Ronald Voisin
June 29, 2018 2:02 pm

You left out a very important part of the video. Shortly after the capsize question is asked the Admiral touches a corner of his eye to hold back a tear.

Reply to  Ronald Voisin
June 29, 2018 5:26 pm

Using the utmost of military self-discipline to fight the urge to laugh out loud? 🙂

June 29, 2018 2:07 pm

I watched Dem Hank Johnson speak at the Wray/Rosenstein hearing this week. His remarks clearly demonstrated his lack of ability to think clearly, or grasp topics, imo.

June 29, 2018 2:48 pm

Meanwhile China is building up artificial islands and arming them to the teeth. go figure

June 29, 2018 3:03 pm

Guam Threatened? I covered this half-fake news here:

June 29, 2018 3:05 pm

At least the Navy didn’t receive the same memo regarding priority #1 being “Muslim outreach” that poor old NASA got saddled with.

John M. Ware
June 29, 2018 3:29 pm

“Strategic Readiness Review” should be rendered SRR, not SSR, unless we want the original expression to read “Strategic Seediness Review” or the like.

June 29, 2018 3:30 pm

Oh man! OH Man, OH MAN!!!!

We have some really dumb politicians in the UK, but none even come close to this guy.

A compilation of Hank Johnson.

I think he’s smoking something, all the time.

Randle Dewees
Reply to  HotScot
June 29, 2018 4:26 pm

An exquisite torture, I caved at 1:35, couldn’t take any more.

Gunga Din
Reply to  HotScot
June 29, 2018 4:54 pm

All I see is a blank space.
(But, then again, I guess all Hank Johnson’s contributions are a ….)

Reply to  Gunga Din
June 29, 2018 5:49 pm

If you’re running NoScript, you’ll need to (temporarily) allow googlevideo to play it.

Bill Murphy
Reply to  HotScot
June 29, 2018 6:53 pm

The truly scary thing is that there is a congressional district in GA that elected this… person. Who lives there and who ran against him? Forrest Gump? William T. Sherman (this IS Georgia, after all)? And the Democrats used to make fun of Dan Quayle? And are calling Trump stupid? Where is the Ibuprofen? This is painful.

Dudley Horscroft
June 29, 2018 3:35 pm

Rather than the “Contiguous CEI” graph to illustrate the story, might it not have been better to provide a temperature graph and a land altitude graph from Guam?

That aside, perhaps the USN is receiving the orders and taking appropriate action, like filing them in the round grey file. I recall a story from the Royal Navy. A file containing a ridiculous proposal landed on the desk of a lieutenant commander in Whitehall. He decided it was so preposterous that it was not while his time preparing a detailed appraisal of the project. Wishing to be polite, instead of writing “Balls” (US speak is ‘Nuts’) in the margin he wrote “Round Objects”. He then addressed the file to his counterpart in Hong Kong, with several other addressees to follow, and put the file in the out tray.

About 18 months later, he was in a Committee and that same file reappeared, having worked its way around the world several times. The Admiral chairing the meeting looked at the file, and said: “Who is Round and why does he object?”

Bruce Cobb
June 29, 2018 4:03 pm

Only one reason the Navy or any of the armed services would buy into (or pretend to) the climate claptrap; money.

Gunga Din
Reply to  Bruce Cobb
June 29, 2018 4:57 pm

And/or, like the FBI etc., those Obama (et. al) placed in positions of authority.
It’s a big swamp. It will time to drain.

old construction worker
Reply to  Bruce Cobb
June 29, 2018 5:22 pm

No. The wheels move very slowly in D.C. The order probably come down back in 2012 and is now being dealt with.

James Beaver
June 29, 2018 5:30 pm

What is stressing the Navy out is a bigger mission scope than what they faced in the 1980’s, with half as many ships & ship types available. Plus, a tiny training budget relative to what is truly needed.

J Mac
Reply to  James Beaver
June 29, 2018 5:56 pm

Yes. Just so….

Reply to  James Beaver
June 30, 2018 4:42 am

Yes, and there is only one recruit training command now, at USNS Great Lakes. This may or may not have been a mistake, but we’ll see what happens in the long term. In my view, too many military bases were closed in the BRAC. At some point, we may need them again.

June 29, 2018 6:03 pm

The last photo in the post shows the latest LCS (Little Crappy Ship) delayed while in transit. Notice the wooden pier pilings in the foreground. Check out the condition of the hull in the vicinity of the second and third pilings. The hull absolutely looks likes it was shoved in by something.
Remember, this is a brand new ship, right out of the shipyard. Was the hull really caved in by a tugboat doing routine maneuvering?
The ship has an aluminum hull and is notoriously thin-skinned. I would bet there is a story in there somewhere.

J Mac
Reply to  TonyL
June 29, 2018 7:03 pm

From the Lockheed Martin Littoral Combat Ships web site:
“Hull: Advanced semi-planing steel monohull”
They are not “an aluminum hull and… notoriously thin-skinned”. Nor are they ‘ice breakers’. Their super structures are quite likely aluminum, as this helps lower the ships center of mass as well as the overall ship weight. It also improves the maneuverability of the ship ‘at speed’.

If you look at the following video and other pictures of these ships, you will see 2 dark ports on each side of the hull, with dark staining extending a bit aft. Exhaust ports of some sort? I don’t know, but they coincide with your ‘shoved in by something’ location. I think you misinterpreted what is shown in the headline photo of this story.

Reply to  J Mac
June 29, 2018 7:26 pm

Oops, my mistake.
Steel hull, Al superstructure.
It does look a bit of a mess, though.
The other LCS (Independence class) apparently is the one with the Al hull.

J Mac
Reply to  TonyL
June 29, 2018 7:36 pm

I think it looks great, especially at 45knots!

Reply to  J Mac
June 30, 2018 4:44 am

Oh, but wasn’t it sad that the crew had to spend the winter frozen in the ice (snort!!!) at Montreal??? Can’t you just sympathize with them? What a terrible burden they had to bear!!!

Pop Piasa
June 29, 2018 9:22 pm

David, you should be teaching critical thinking classes (as if there were any such courses of study in post-modern academia).

June 30, 2018 12:33 am

From https://physicstoday.scitation.org/doi/full/10.1063/PT.3.1257

“When they come, it will be at high water,” Rommel told his troops time and again.

If history is anything to go by, then rising sea levels are of benefit to the US navy 🙂

June 30, 2018 3:46 am

On the other side of the globe, Cyclone Yasi slammed northeastern Australia, destroying homes and crops and displacing hundreds of thousands of people.

hmm if i had seen that back then…I’d have tried to get correction
thousands yes
hundreds of thousands NO!

June 30, 2018 4:21 am

RADM Philips spent 30 years in the Navy? Okay, then what was her specialty, IF she had one? SecDef James Mattis spent his entire career in the Marine Corps in combat infantry. What did RADM Philips do? Was she in Meteorology? Oceanography? What? Female Admirals are rather rare. I met the first female Admiral (Duerk) Nurse Corps at NS Great Lakes in 1972.

Without that information, there is nothing but ‘she was an Admiral’ in this. No, she was a Rear Admiral and the author of that silly piece does not tell us if she was RADM Lower Half (O-7 – used to be Commodore) or Upper Half (O-8). Full pay grade in difference.

I can have a very good friend find out about this, but throwing someone’s name into something with no specifics means N-O-T-H-I-N-G. NOTHING.

The ship that was stuck in ice and wintered over at Montreal last winter was newly launched. We had quite a giggle over it. I’m sure those sailors suffered from being forced to eat French cooking and being presented with some very ordinary table wines! 🙂 Poor things!

Tom Abbott
Reply to  Sara
June 30, 2018 6:47 am

The crew successfully adapted to the climate change.

Now the climate has changed again and they can go out to sea.

David Hart
June 30, 2018 6:49 am

Sara, since you asked:

Rear Admiral Ann C. Phillips, USN (Ret) is a member of the Center for Climate and Security’s Advisory Board. A Surface Warfare Officer, Rear Admiral Phillips has served in every warfare group of the Surface Navy: Destroyers, Aircraft Carriers, Amphibious, and Replenishment Ships. During her 31 years on active duty she commissioned and commanded USS MUSTIN (DDG 89), and commanded Destroyer Squadron TWO EIGHT, and Expeditionary Strike Group TWO – which included all the Amphibious Expeditionary Forces on the East Coast of the United States. Ashore she was a Senior Fellow on the CNO’s Strategic Studies Group XXVIII, and managed requirements and resources for the Surface Navy as Deputy Director and Director of Surface Warfare Division, (N86) in the Pentagon. While at N86, from 2009-2012 she served on the Chief of Naval Operations’ Climate Change Task Force, and Energy Task Force, where she Co-Chaired the Surface Force Working Group – developing and implementing climate change adaptation and energy reduction strategies for the Navy. In addition, she has served overseas in Guam and Lisbon, Portugal, and operated extensively with NATO and Partnership for Peace nations.

Jim Whelan
June 30, 2018 11:55 am

“According to a report by the Center for Climate & Security released earlier this year, 200 military installations participating in a vulnerability assessment have already been affected by storm surge flooding.”

Which is to say that things that have happened in the past are still happening.

June 30, 2018 1:06 pm

Seas have been rising at the same rate for thousands of years.

June 30, 2018 3:02 pm

So a branch of the military has identified a potential threat that forces them, unfortunately, to increase spending. We have that in Sweden also. Every spring of a new budget period for the navy, the swedish coast is invaded by possible submarines, probably Russian. The media calls them budget-submarines, well not in print of course but in between collueges. It is important to keep funding high in case of future cuts, so they waste money, all gov institutions do inherently.

Gordon Jeffrey Giles
June 30, 2018 3:18 pm

Naval Intelligence (not the section but the overall) has been diminished by the removal during the Obama Administration of any staff officers with a brain. When they leadership acquiesced to the plan to buy bio-diesel for battle vessels to go to sea @$74 /gal… I knew it was over.

Johann Wundersamer
July 1, 2018 1:21 pm

response to threat increases in theater, –>

response to threat increases in weather,

Louis Hooffstetter
July 2, 2018 10:03 pm

“climate-related civilian unrest…”

Syria? Somalia? Ukraine? Seattle? Berkeley?

%d bloggers like this: