Pentagon to fight “climate change”
The Washington Times‘ Rowan Scarborough writes that the White House has directed the Pentagon to consider “climate change” in it’s day-to-day operations. Climate change was formerly known as “Global Warming” and also the “New Ice Age”. But, in it’s endeavor to fight everything except our nation’s enemies, the White House has directed a new layer of bureaucracy to be formed in the Pentagon, you know, because there’s not enough bureaucracy in the Pentagon now.
To four-star generals and admirals, among them the regional combatant commanders who plan and fight the nation’s wars, the directive tells them: “Incorporate climate change impacts into plans and operations and integrate DoD guidance and analysis in Combatant Command planning to address climate change-related risks and opportunities across the full range of military operations, including steady-state campaign planning and operations and contingency planning.”
And, just in case you thought the matter was up for debate;
Mr. Obama says there is no debate on the existence of man-made global warming and its ensuing climate change.
The directive calls for changes to tactics and techniques of war-fighting which explains why we’ve been so slow to destroy ISIS – apparently no one has done the Environmental Impact Statement on killing thousands of terrorists in a virtual wasteland.
Category: Big Pentagon
That’s why the U.S. didn’t bomb a couple of hundred ISIS oil tankers recently. Because of the havoc that would have caused by all of that oil smoke and heat released. Good thing for his career that the general overseeing that portion of air war was dialed in to Buh-rock the First and the religion of Climate change.
Good grief, spare us from these Eco freaks.
The had to change the name from “Glob All Wurming” to climate change because they looked so freaking stupid saying that in the middle of a blizzard! Now they can espouse “climate change” which is just as freaking stupid because climate changes about every 15 minutes!!
There’s no debate? A large ton of actual (i.e. not Al Gore) scientists disagree. Even the ones who believe it’s a thing can’t agree on how they think it works. They also can’t explain why their models are consistently wrong. The Glorious Leader might want to revisit his 5th-Grade science textbook and look up “hypothesis,” “theory,” and “consensus” before he opens his mouth again.
Now, TOW – Fearless Leader has spoken on the subject. Dissent is Thoughtcrime and will be punished accordingly.
I’m happy to meet with the Ministry of Truth to discuss the matter, but they better come armed.
Oh, they’ll send the Ministry of Love first. 😉
Better watch out, TOW! I’ve heard that National Science Foundation SWAT team are some touch hombres!
Why? Is Lars their doorkicker? Oh no, I’m really scared now! He might annoy me to death!
“Touch hombre’s”…
Even if that was a slip, it is damn fitting !!!
ROFLMMFAO !!!
How did I miss ‘touch hombres’??? How???? I usually see these things!
I know what they do: they come trotting up, carefully carrying their whipped cream double chocolate ginger lattes in covered containers so as to not spill it, and poke you until you pay attention to them.
How the hell did I miss that???
I’ve always wondered how many SUVs it took to end the last Ice Age….
No they don’t. How Fox News always manages to drag out the couple of fringe weirdos and present their opinions as the only truth, is beyond me. In fact, scientific consensus, by people who actually study the issue, is overwhelmingly in favor of the concept of climate change and has been so since at least the 80s. There is no vast conspiracy designed to enrich scientists off of studying a fake issue for decades and if there were, they are doing it wrong. If you want to hear someone laugh and cry at the same time, go ahead and ask any university professor on how high the pile of money they sleep on every night is.
Right, which is why hundreds of scientist have sent a letter to Congress accusing NOAA of making up the data.
Consensus doesn’t mean right. Consensus used to say the earth was flat too.
http://dailycaller.com/2016/01/28/300-scientists-want-noaa-to-stop-hiding-its-global-warming-data/
Thanks for backing me up. “Signers also included: 25 climate or atmospheric scientists, 23 geologists, 18 meteorologists…” The rest were engineers, physicists, chemists, economists, and others, i.e. unqualified “scientists”. So out of the 300 who signed the petition, a whopping 66 were ones who actually are qualified to speak on this matter. 66 vs thousands over decades does not look like an overwhelming support of these ideas to me.
And you’re right, consensus does not automatically make an issue truer. But it does lend more credence to the likeliness of the theory than a couple of dissenters do.
Professors don’t get the money directly, but money does fund research and thus keeps their salary and university perks going.
MIT for example is a big offender in publishing findings prematurely to make news and get funding. (such as they did with their claim to cure all viruses)Years later there’s nothing but silence.
Yes there’s climate change, cuz climates change…centering it on CO2 alone and creating costly mandates to correct it certainly does generate money for those involved.
If you look at the money out there being offered to study various topics, many are overtly liberal topics. All you have to do is write up the grant proposal and wait.
I’ve always wondered about that. If wealthy individuals and organizations are more conservative leaning, why don’t they just offer money to study the opposite? Or perhaps they do and the findings don’t line up with their expectations? Does reality have a liberal bias? 😉
IIRC, the Koch bros. did exactly this a while ago to keep the gov from imposing harmful rules on their business, but for some reason those studies never gained much traction. Makes you wonder.
And that’s what it’s all about.
$$$$$$
Lots and lots of $$$$$$.
Politicians and politically aligned scientists can’t be bothered with those petty facets of the scientific method like validity and reproducibility, there’s awards and grants that need to be given out right now.
and of course many really wonderful organizations that do huge amounts of good in the world have to reiterate the party line or they risk losing their funding. They will tell you why they need money and what they’re doing with it, but now they have added the climate change blurb for the sake of conformity. It’s really sad that these organizations and the people they serve would suffer if they didn’t walk lockstep with the current administration and chant, ” climate change, climate change!”
It’s the complete lack of understanding or acknowledging the necessity for the presence of CO2 in the atmosphere. Without it, plants including plankton do not have a way to convert CO2 to sugar and in the process, release O2 as a byproduct.
I don’t know why this is so hard to understand. Anyone who knows even a little bit about biology knows about that simple cycle. In fact, a recent study shows that phytoplankton are more responsible for releasing atmospheric O2 than land plants, in volumes of 50% to 85% of the total.
http://www.astrobio.net/topic/solar-system/earth/biosphere/plankton-are-key-to-earths-oxygen/
So, keeping the large water bodies clear of junk is a good idea, but a lot of that stuff resolves itself, as can be found in fossil records of ancient seagoing creatures, including pelagic fish.
Does anyone want to argue this point? I have more than enough backup for this. I’m being nice today.
You want fries with that, Lars, you poodle??????
I asked a co-worker who was all about climate change and reducing CO2 why he hated plants so much.
He walked away from me.
Must be a mouth-breather.
I’m not Lars, but I still have to wonder what you are talking about. Plants convert CO2 into O2… ok. Is anyone disputing that?
You have no idea how many people I have run into who think that plants use up oxygen that we need. I am quite serious about that.
But it’s not disputing the conversion to O2, it’s the simply fact that without atmospheric CO2 available for conversion by plants, most animal life will die off. The giant bugs of the Carboniferous era got that way because of excessive atmospheric O2.
Also, these climate cycles change regularly from interglacial (now) to glacial (18,000 yrs ago) and have been doing so for several million years, long before humans arrived in even a primitive form.
So what was your question?
It is not centered on CO2 alone. It is well known that methane and other greenhouse gases are also big or even greater contributors to climate change. But while we can’t do much to stop cows from farting, we can work to create more efficient electronics, decrease the burning of oil, etc.
How long has Earth been around?
How long have humans been on Earth?
Did the climate change anytime BEFORE humans showed up?
Did the climate change before the Industrial Age kicked off?
And yet, humans are responsible for the latest round of climate change.
That’s some arrogance right there.
Useless trivia: Farts are mostly nitrogen, hydrogen sulfide and carbon dioxide not methane.
I’m sure herbivorous dinosaurs had much larger fart volumes than cattle.
You see the claim a couple weeks ago that cavemen were to blame for the start of global warming …FFS, spontaneous combustion on the planet back then probably dwarfed anything cavemen were putting out.
Michael Mann, the climategate supremacist, has insisted for some time now that campfires started by tribes of hunter-gatherers are completely to blame for the start of the current warming cycle, which actually started 18,000 years ago, some time after hunter-gatherer tribes began to band together to become farmers.
Um, yeah. Now you can explain why & how the CAGW model can’t explain the medieval warm period, the equivalent period back in Roman times, and the little ice age.
After that you can explain how they still haven’t established the climate’s actual sensitivity to carbon, or why they can’t determine if carbon is a leading or trailing indicator.
Finally you can explain why anyone takes the warmists’ claims seriously when it turned out that the formula they used estimate feedback for increased carbon in the atmosphere came from a book on electronic circuitry. Yes, they’ve been using a formula for electronic feedback to model carbon feedback. Even NASA.
Not to mention pretty much every prediction made by the warmists with respect to CAGW has been … wrong.
I don’t think either of us benefits from a debate on the nature of climate change, but just to speak with some experience of an area I know a bit about, the models aren’t consistently ‘wrong’.
Scientific models are a way of testing ideas, and the results you get depend on a large number of factors – input quality, system type, resolution of the model, approximations used, etc. There can be -and often are!- small problems that arise from any one of these, but overall, the models are consistent and produce ‘viable’ output.
To give an analogy, it’d be like shooting at a 50-meter pistol target and your first shot landing just left in the 9-ring, your second shot landing to the right and up in the 8-ring, and your last landing just below dead center. All three shots are good, scoring shots, and none mean your shooting is ‘wrong’ or the gun sights are ‘wrong’, etc. These are just small deviations due to countless factors, but they typically converge on the center and would be considered accurate.
As an aside, models similar to these are used to do everything from design jet engines, build better structures and to test trajectories and missions for NASA. Scientific modeling almost never gives a singular answer to a problem. They give an answer which is compared to theories and other evidence. The climate models, even with all their assumptions and shortcomings, do a very good job at providing a tool for studying climate effects.
Thank you for your rational input.
YOU don’t know me, Commissar.
Models similar to these are also used to predict weather. That’s why those who use the models to predict weather are called weather guessers. Because there actually are variables.
So, we should hitch our wagons to something that “almost never gives a singular answer to a problem.”?
In short, yes. Because once you exclude the obvious errors, the answers you get are accurate, they’re just imprecise – hence the variation you get.
If we set a gun up on a mount and fired at a target, then fired again from the same position, do you think we’d hit the same spot exactly? No, because variations in wind, vibrations in the mount from the first shot and countless other factors would render it a slightly different flight path. It’d be accurate, but slightly imprecise.
That’s the same issue with these models, for the most part. Sure, you have your occasional total misfire, bad ammo, or some other equivalent, but they’re fairly well tested. It’s just that they’re run in incredibly diverse and complex environments, resulting in some variation. People then seize upon such variation and say they don’t agree, but the broad trends do.
This isn’t to say they’re perfect -far from it!- but their validity as an accurate tool to the best of our understanding is pretty certain. So, yes, despite the lack of a singular answer to a problem, results from them are very useful in terms of the science.
You’ve done an excellent job of explaining the “effect”. Even that guy who shall not be named understood it.
Now comes the real challenge, What’s the cause? Because that is the true debate of global warming/global cooling/climate change/destruction of the ozone layer etc. How much (if any) is caused by humans and how much is just the planet trying to find the natural happy medium of heat and cold? I heard a reputable scientist once postulate that maybe we’re experiencing “climate change” brought on by the extreme pollution of the industrial revolution.
Sometimes it comes down to a lesson I learned at a very young age, from a very experienced Teton Range mountaineer:
“Mother nature is a fickle vicious bitch and if you turn your back on her, she’ll kill you”.
I completely agree that looking at root causes is the real challenge. And, honestly, a pretty interesting area of study – though not one I know a whole lot about.
Often times civilians or the media have ridiculously oversimplified views of military matters, and that oversimplification results in a lack of understanding of the people and nature of the military itself. Similarly, I think many people have an oversimplified view of how complex and accurate some of our climate science tools are, and that leads to an unfair dismissal of the science itself.
Since I know a tiny bit about the modeling (but really, that’s about it), I just wanted to try to explain how it works.
You ever want to grab a beer and debate the merits of potential causes of climate change, though, I’m all for it. Chances are, I think, it’s a bit of everything. The big question is which are the the biggest factors that we can do something about, I guess.
Um, no. They been consistently off when predicting climate temperature increases, always on the high side. Actual temperatures have been consistently lower than projected.
Then there’s the issue with Urban Heat Island effects, and the highly doubtful proxies used as stand-ins for regions without reliable temperature data. That’s not to mention the “adjustments” various groups have made to the data, to the point where the original raw data isn’t available.
And -as I mentioned above- they’ve been using a formula for feedback in an electronic circuit to model climate feedback.
As if the ROEs weren’t fucked up enough, now they’ll have to consider the environmental impact of burning a building to the ground?
Why do so many officers seem to lose their fucking minds when they step through the doors of the Puzzle Palace?
I don’t think they actually lose their minds, VOV. They look at each other, drink a lot, and count the days until retirement.
Quite probably. IMO, the atmosphere inside the beltway induces those behaviors in anyone stuck there who is (1) sane and (2) also has common sense.
Yeah, as I recall Zoomie (ADM Zumwalt) kind of toed the line until his own son developed cancer related to Agent Orange exposure and died from it. Then he retired and literally went on a verbal rampage. (Well, for him it was a rampage.)
“Mr. Obama says there is no debate on the existence of man-made global warming and its ensuing climate change.”
Thank goodness that’s settled. Remember, he has a pen and he has a phone.
You too, 2/17 Air Cav – see my comment to TOW above. (smile)
I hear Obama said on Saturday that there was no debate that Panthers would become Super Bowl champs.
I’m guessing that burning shit is right out of the question.
What? No more shit burning detail? That was a great way to pass the day while everyone else did missions.
I’ve done my part. I no longer toss batteries in the garbage. I place them there gently.
So, that AFP photo of a firefighter at a burning oil tank farm in Libya (a little gift from ISIS) doesn’t figure into this, because GIIXSSZZZ!
Sorry, that’s what I sound like when I try to stifle a sneeze.
When is that jackass leaving the White House? When??????
20 January 2017. Whether or not his replacement is an improvement remains to be determined – unfortunately.
A little story:
21 Jan 2017
A retired old soldier walks up to a Marine Sentry at the White House at 0700 and says “I demand to talk to President Barack Obama immediately!” The Marine Sentry says “Sir, he does not work here anymore.” The old soldier looks around and shuffles off slowly…
22 Jan 2017
The same retired old soldier walks up to the same Marine Sentry at the White House at 0700 and says “I demand to talk to President Barack Obama immediately!” The Marine Sentry says “Sir, he does not work here anymore.” The old soldier looks around and shuffles off slowly…
23 Jan 2017
The same retired old soldier walks up to the same Marine Sentry at the White House at 0700 and says “I demand to talk to President Barack Obama immediately!” The Marine Sentry says “Sir, he does not work here anymore. Sir… this is the 3rd day in a row I have informed you of this.” The old soldier looks around, smiles, and says “I know, but I just love hearing you say it!”
The Marine Sentry snaps to attention, salutes the retired soldier, and says “See you at 0700 tomorrow sir!”
Gigglesnort.
LMAO….
So, how did WWII progress without this desperately needed impact statement incorporated into its planning?
My God! The possibility of rolling a tank over an anthill and destroying those millions of lives! Or the dung beetles! Think of the dung beetles!
The Raid on Ploesti would have had them screaming in the night!
They would have had nightmares about the bombings of Tokyo, Dresden, Hiroshima or Nagasaki…
Not to mention the eco-disaster involving oil off the Carolinas during WW II. Where did it all go?
Not to mention all the ships sunk in Ironbottom Sound alone.
“Think of the dung beetles”
I spend as little time thinking about Hillary as possible, thanks.
Could you post a spew alert, for Pete’s sake?!?
Oh, sorry.
SPEW ALERT!
There ya go.
Too late. Now cleaning off keyboard.
Depth charges killed Flipper!
Flipper is dead? Say it ain’t so.
Liberalism is a mental illness.
Need any more evidence?
▲▲▲▲ Like ▲▲▲▲
If further evidence is needed, see the posts by Lars.
I just want to know what effect this will have on shit burning detail.
You’ll have to dig a hole and bury it, for posterity and archaeologists to find later.
Well you’re going to need a dig permit prior to digging the hole. And before they can award the permit there will have to be an environmental impact study so try and keep you colon clogged for 6-8 months at a time so we can process the paperwork.
And here I thought the military was SUPPOSED to practice to, and kill our nations enemies. Silly me….
CDR Sal opines on his blog. Well worth the read.
http://cdrsalamander.blogspot.com/
Nah, you guys are getting this all wrong. This is genius, sheer genius.
You see, every military organization has a number of officers and senior NCOs who are basically worthless, contribute nothing to the mission and are nothing but a PITA.
Well, now these useless people can be assigned a meaningless job.
“Major Dumbass, please prepare a Climate Change Impact briefing for our next op. Make sure you get MSG Fatass to assist you.”
“Yes Sir!” Useless officer and NCO then work diligently on their power point briefing, time that they would normally spend sticking their noses into other people’s affairs and generally screwing them up.
Finally it comes time for the big mission brief. Maj. Dumbass says “When do I go on?” G-3 says “Oh, Sorry, Major, we don’t have time for your portion. Just email it to me and I’ll have the staff read through it before the mission brief and incorporate it into our planning. And thanks for your great work!”
Genius, I’m telling you. 😉
Absolutely. Sounds like an assignment for some overzealous NCOs who stick their noses into everyone else’s business and snitch on them, over nothing.
Major Taylor, I have a project that requires your undivided attention. Please stay off the Internet until it’s complete.
(smile)
Tell me that Lars is NOT a Major. Please.
Sorry. 🙁
Well, he’s a major douchebag, so there’s that.
As ExPH2 noted, he’s [the very model of] a modern major asshole.
Perfect place to stash excess CW4s and CW5s.
Not like they really do anything anyway…
And this board likes to pretend the views expressed characterize the sentiment of veterans.
The DoD has accepted climate change as a reality for more than a decade and has already been contingency planning for the consequences of the displaced population causing instability in regions.
This is real. And it is necessary to prepare for it because the consequences are already having destabilizing effects.
Larsie-poo,
Aren’t you late for your appointment for a broken glass enema?
The only “destabilizing effects” are in Libtards minds. . . .such as yours, for example.
B Woodman knows me, Commissar DOES NOT.
China is the biggest and worst polluter on the planet. What are you going to do about that, Taylor? With ISIS seizing oil wells in Libya and setting fire to tank farms – MY GOD! THE AIR POLLUTION! – the possibility of poisonous gases from burning petroleum spreading further and further afield is rising.
Or, wait – oh, I know! You’ve completely forgotten or never heard of Saddam Hussein’s firestorm in the oil fields of Kuwait, started by his Imperial Guard (or whatever) dynamiting oil wellheads as they left. The smoke could be seen and photographed from space.
So you take your idiotic nonsense about climate change and stuff it. IT IS OUT OF THE CONTROL OF THE HUMAN RACE. WE HAVE LESS TO DO WITH IT THAN THE PLANET’S OWN AGENDA DOES.
Note that I put that in large letters so that it is easily read by any bloviating dorkward.
The Department of Defense is supposed to DEFEND the USA from enemies. That’s its primary purpose.
But ol’ Lars the trout-sniffing poodle doesn’t get that, because of his GUILTS stuff about being human.
Oh, yes – I like to provide backup for things when possible. This is a 1991 article from the NYTimes, referencing those fires in the oil fields.
http://www.nytimes.com/1991/01/23/world/war-gulf-overview-iraq-sets-oil-refineries-afire-allies-step-up-air-attacks.html?pagewanted=all
Since Lars the trout-sniffing poodle does not provide backup, and disputes the opinions of other people, he can blow his opinions on climate right out his barracks bag.
I’m completely with you that this sort of nonsense -especially if it’s to happen at the mission level!- is simply absurd. But I’ll take issue with this statement:
Gravity is another of the planet’s (well, universe’s) agendas, and we’ve sent people to the moon and back. Doing that required engines capable of more thrust than we ever thought possible until that very decade. And here we aren’t talking about completely thwarting a fundamental force (like gravity), but rather nudging something -granted, a large something!- by a small amount. It’s like having a boulder rolling down a hill – try to stop the boulder and you’ll get squashed, but build a small structure that can deflect it slightly and you can avoid catastrophic destruction.
Maybe that makes me a bloviating dorkward, or maybe it’s just my engineering background, or maybe those two are redundant. But humanity has been mucking up nature’s plans in countless ways for quite some time.. I’ll continue to have some faith in our ability to do so for the foreseeable future.
(If you want to argue that the US can do little about it because our role, compared to China, is pretty small, I’m somewhat inclined to agree, at least directly. If we make lots of changes and they don’t, not much happens. It’s a bit like trying to lift something heavy that requires five or six people – if just one does it, he’s a sucker. It can’t be done. If everyone does, you can actually move heavy things.)
But humanity has been mucking up nature’s plans in countless ways for quite some time. – OK, how? By existing? Is this self-hatred for being human? As an engineer, you would likely be aware of the pea-soup smog that afflicted London from the 19th century to the 1950s. It was caused by several things, and among them the use of natural gas for heating and cooking. Another cause was London’s location at the head of what was very long ago a wetland estuary, and has long since been turned into a major river through HUMAN engineering. This smog, however, was entirely located in and around London and did not move outside London into the countryside. The rest of southwestern England was, in fact, quite free of it. It did exist before the Industrial Revolution, but that simply increased it by a substantial amount. My point is that while pollution is manmade (Beijing hasn’t seen a sunny day in a couple of decades), it is usually confined to human spaces. For example, how many climate measurements are being taken in open farmland where there are no city streets or heat islands created by tall buildings? In a 120+ year period, humans have recorded temperatures in populated areas. Who has been doing that in unpopulated areas? My daily temperature readings are completely different from those 35 miles away. My car has to pass an emissions test every two years because of the general area in which I live. 250 miles to the south, people in my home town don’t have to do this, and this is entirely based on population demographics, not on pollution levels. So I completely dispute the idea that we have any control over changes in the climate from one cold cycle to the next warming. This warming cycle started 18,000 years ago, LONG BEFORE HUMANS BUILT THE CITIES WE NOW HAVE AND LONG BEFORE ANY MODERN TECHNOCRAP WAS EVEN A BRIGHT IDEA. Climate is NOT the same thing as gravity at all. That’s comparing apples to tangerines. Poppycock. You are alluding to all kinds of pollution as climate… Read more »
But humanity has been mucking up nature’s plans in countless ways for quite some time. – OK, how? By existing? Is this self-hatred for being human? Ha, I’m not sure where you get that from – it was just a turn of the tongue. I quite love being human, and quite love mucking around with Mother Nature at any scale I can. I simply meant that we muck of nature’s plans of our deteriorating eyesight with glasses, we tackle all sorts of natural diseases through modern medicine, and when mother nature didn’t see fit to give us wings, we built them ourselves. We have a tendency to succeed where physics and nature were disinclined to let us do so without technology. Basically, human ingenuity and technology is a ‘force multiplier’ on humanity’s efforts. If you had said the climate is out of control of humans without the use of technology, I’d agree – just as controlled flight would be, refrigeration would be (except for those in the arctic regions?), etc. But as a species we do some remarkable things -like, oh, get off this planet entirely?- when we apply our technology. I’m inclined to think the same is true for affecting the climate. For example, how many climate measurements are being taken in open farmland where there are no city streets or heat islands created by tall buildings? Well, our data sources are getting better and better – and yes, by extrapolation, that means they weren’t so good at some point in the past. But just like ‘dialing in’ a shot on a target, our improving data makes predictions and trends better, but it’s a strange twist of phrase to say a better result means the previous, less precise one was ‘wrong’. It was the best we had at the time. For the record, I’ve heard of projects to put sensors adrift in the oceans by the thousands, courtesy of small, cheap electronics. We get better and better coverage with our data all the time. Here’s another analogy – the US Census Bureau and the UN both estimate the world… Read more »
OH, LC, you really must look up the volume of pollution produced by the eruption of Mt. Pinatubo. That was enough to drop the global mean temperature 1 degree centigrade. Seriously, the ash dispersal alone blocked sunlight for 18 months and dropped the temperature, too. Wind farms do not change the direction of the wind. The turbines change direction to get the highest surface contact with a windstream. They are just modern versions of windmills. Look up windmills. Windmills – wind turbines – the device doesn’t matter. The machinery changes direction with the way the wind blows, not the other way around. And if the wind current is too strong for a wind turbine to accommodate it, the wind turbine will burn out. Happened last year in at least one wind farm during a derecho. There may have been more. It was on the news, for Pete’s sake. do you think I make up stuff like this? In regard to warming cycles as opposed to the variations within those cycles, this variation in the current interglacial period may be coming to an end. It happened at the beginning of the 14th century, which ended the Medieval Warm Period, and there is no reason it can’t happen again. On the other hand, at some point, the planet may reach its ‘overload’ point and plunge back into a real ice age. We are, in fact, still IN an ice age. It never really ended. The shortest interglacial period I’ve been able to find was the Aftonian, which started 330,000 BCE and lasted until 300,000 BCE. 30,000 years in length. But there is no saying that this interglacial we are in might not be the shortest one on record, is there? It is ludicrous to think that we have any control over anything on this planet beyond our own lives. We can engineer it to pieces, as we’ve tried to do with the Mississippi River, and at some point, it smacks us up the side of our heads. If you do not remember the levees breaking on Ol’ Miss in the early 1990s,… Read more »
Mankind is contributing to climate change.
Probably significantly.
Must be frustrating to be one of the last guard for a debunked and dying belief system. Best of luck to you.
Oh, good grief – the trout-sniffer has to try to get the last word in!
Mankind is mostly contributing to pollution, you moron. And every time you breathe, you add more pollution to the atmospheric levels. So shut up, will you?
Commissar does not know me.
HEY LARS, it was proven fact that the 1992 eruption of Mount Pinatubo in the Philippines poured more pollutants into the atmosphere than the entire Industrial Age all put together, so are you and your pot-headed Disney Princess-lusting candy-farting unicorn-chasers gonna call for a UN Summit on Volcano Control?
That’s an oft-repeated claim, but it’s actually not correct. The same link I shared above has some data on the Pinatubo eruption. It was incredible, absolutely, but considerably smaller overall than other factors:
https://volcanoes.usgs.gov/hazards/gas/climate.php
The eruption dropped the mean global temperature 1 degree centigrade for a year.
Wow, the DoD was ordered to do something and they did it.
Doesn’t matter if they agree with it or not, Lars, they follow orders.
Now, kindly go fuck yourself with a rabid porcupine.
No no not a porcupine. Remember? Lars dates minority women as he was so quick to point out in a separate thread that was discussing racism.
I do not think the context in which I brought up my girlfriend was “racism.” I am near positive it was a thread on China.
Is it THAT or are you heartbroken from the redheaded Latvian Circus Midget from the next street over turning you down yet again, eh kid?
Why was it even necessary for Lars the poodle to even bring up his now ex-girlfriend’s ethnic origin?
I mentioned she specialized in Chinese politics. I think it was relevant at the time.
Lars you are mis-remembering. It had nothing to do with Chinese politics. A thread about Syrian refugees had devolved into racism speak. You made it a point that you had a date with an ex-girlfriend who was Chinese, and that you were also dating a Syrian woman. I’m not accusing you of lying, but it WAS a thread about racism, and you DID bring up your minority relationships to show your white guilt.
It wasn’t relevant. I could major in Chinese politics, too, and I’m not Chinese. Ethnicity has nothing to do with it.
Geez, you don’t even try.
Exactly! I was about to comment the exact same thing.
Lars liberal elitist racism comes shining through… you only mention your Chinese girlfriend if the subject is Chinese politics? Or Chinese geography? Or Chinese…..
You sure pulled that out of your ass.
I do not remember the context in which it was brought up.
This whole attempt to spin my comments to fit the narrative of your perception is a waste of my time to fight.
You will generate whatever narrative and perception you wish, using out of context statements and assumption about my intent to “prove” your perception in your own mind.
Selectivity bias is like that.
Looked but could not find the original comment.
It was buried in pages of comments by posters on this board talking about me and mentioning “Chinese politics”,.
Most of the comments were random acts of nonsense. So whatever I said it has been buried in a shitpile of idiocy.
I was actually blown away how much you people talk about me when I am not around.
I bet that Lars hasn’t gotten laid in so long that his virginity has been reinstated.
You are projecting.
Unless you count minority women. He dates them more than Bill the horndog Clinton.
Commissar does not know me.
I would offer a rebuttal, but John Ringo already did it more poetically than I ever could in “The Last Centurion.”
So, Lars, read the book, then eat shit and die. Between now and then, fuck off.
My all-time favorite book after ‘Starship Troopers.’
“The DoD has accepted climate change as a reality for more than a decade and has already been contingency planning for the consequences of the displaced population causing instability in regions.”
Yeah, well the DoD has also forced me to make risk assessment reports for classes I teach that involve nothing but sitting at a desk and listening to the instructor. Sometimes in the DoD we just do whatever stupid shit we’re told to do to get it over with.
Because the Government (DoD most definitely included) has NEVER done anything silly, illogical, or straight-up retarded! And they especially have never done so for petty political reasons!
“And this board likes to pretend the views expressed characterize the sentiment of veterans.”
Um, question for Lars: WHERE?
I have never seen Jonn Lilyea preface any of his personal opinions with the assertion “I SPEAK FOR ALL VETERANS”.
To the contrary, he generally expresses his opinion in the first person tense or otherwise makes clear that he is stating his own opinion.
Being that he has an opinion, and states it frequently, one would think that anyone who did not want to read his opinion would stop coming here.
I remember one of your first posts here Lars. You threw out the, “shoddy journalism” card and then had your ass handed to you. One would think that would be enough to keep you from coming back. But no, the scientific evidence points to the contrary.
Why do you come here Lars? You are universally loathed by everyone else here (scientific consensus). If you think everyone buys your lies, look up 5 paragraphs.
I think it’s safe to say that the vast majority of the opinions given here represent what most Veterans think and Commissar reflects the opinions of the Vets that are slobbering blithering moonbat libtard IDIOTS.
GDC: I speak for every Veteran in my household, every last swingin’ one.
I speak for myself. Jonn Lilyea does not speak for me, unless I have laryngitis or a bad cold.
I speak for myself, shitbird. My opinions are my own. Your hammer(and sickle) fisted approach to everything is tiring. Take your half truths and “facts” and pound sand, pussy.
A lot of shit talk behind anonymous screen names and I am the “pussy”?
You DON’T know me, Commissar.
Can’t get a date, huh, poodle?
Yes he can. With minority women only though…
Lars, you SO remind me of a boy in my OSUT Platoon that the DS’s nicknamed “Poodle Dick” after the second day of Basic Training because he was such a petty juvenile little shit like you!
Go eat a dozen rotten pineapples wrapped in asbestos you POODLE DICK!
How sad. Another one of the trout-sniffer’s attempts at provoking a long, long line of comments in which he’s told he’s generally a waste of time in the sack and his mother’s choice was the wrong one.
Would you like fries with that, poodle?
Rub some Vagisil on it and shut the fuck up, Lars.
Oh, SMACK!!! That will leave a mark…. LMMFAO
The DoD has also accepted that the LCS is a combat ship.
And -as usual- no data to back up silly claims.
Does this mean the next time we have a war we have to pre-plot maneuver damage and get it approved before we fight?
No, it’s not about maneuver damage. That is only a small part of it.
It’s the CO and CO2 levels generated by heavy and light equipment, the propulsion gases generated by artillery usage, the cubic tonnage generated by human waste, including fecal matter, trash, unused food and urine, as well as the size of the midden kitchen or garbage dump it will create, in addition to the CO2 generated by troops and equipment moving about. Shellcasings and metal debris will also have to be calculated.
This does not even begin to address the cubic tonnage or volume of corpses rotting in the battlefield.
You see, it’s not just simple preplot manure damage.
But it will be a good day for the crows, once it’s approved.
So, part of the battle plan will be how many trees have to be planted to offset the carbon emissions?
Trees???
Don’t the liberals always give planting trees as the answer to pretty much everything?
Well, that and increasing taxes.
True…and proclaiming, “it’s for the children.” is liberal validity.
Owing a Prius or a Subaru also helps.
Here’s the n. You know where it goes if you want to put it there.
yeah, but what’s your dignity worth?
I am so stealing this.
Geez, you guys and your sex talk. Could you just save it for the football or hockey nights? Geezo Pete!
Requests for air and/or artillery support will require a 6-9 month environmental impact study and be subject to EPA guidelines. Danger close strikes wil also need each member of the unit in contact to sign multiple legal waivers 14 days prior to the danger close strike.
Maybe next they’ll call for units to scale back on PT in order to reduce exhalation of CO2 on installations?
So,
The Red Shed just added more Perfumed Princes to the Five Sided Puzzle Palace.
Our nation is such a pathetic, hollowed-out shell of itself. We deserve to collapse.
jan 2017 cannot come quick enough
I wonder if the brass have played this out..ok, ok we will do this, make plans and perform studies hopefully that will eat away enough time a new cinc will tell us we aint doing that shit.
So if the “climate change” gang assumes CO2 is the primary culprit:
An accepted number of 0.9L per day is the amount of CO2 exhaled by the average human. Eliminating 100 enemy fighters would result in preventing close to 33,000L of CO2 per year from being put into the atmosphere. 100 bad guys per day for a few years – the polar ice caps and the rain forests in Brazil might be saved.
Yep. I think the US military can do their part to slow climate change…
But, the rain forests in Brazil harbor the mosquitos that spread the Zika virus. And, the mosquitos fly, spreading the virus from man to woman. When the women and men aren’t using more, uh, social ways of spreading the virus.
So, rain forests bad.
Au contraire –
Rain forests and Zika virus are good:
Small-headed babies are just what the Liberals want as a future voting block.
True, I overlooked that obvious point.
Better watch out, people… some think that we should be prosecuted under RICO for being “Climate Change Skeptics”:
http://dailycaller.com/2015/09/17/scientists-ask-obama-to-prosecute-global-warming-skeptics/#ixzz3m6i5gZfj
From some time ago… seems that someone close to the cause was make false claims of being a Nobel Peace Prize winner with the Goreacle:
https://johnosullivan.wordpress.com/2012/10/28/michael-mann-retracts-false-nobel-prize-claims-in-humiliating-climbdown/
This isn’t telling DoD to fight climate change, it is telling DoD to plan for the impacts climate change may have on the security environment. In other words, it is telling DoD and Combatant Commanders to do some IPB.
Here’s the actual directive: http://www.dtic.mil/whs/directives/corres/pdf/471521p.pdf
It’s agnostic on the causes of climate change, and doesn’t even really specify where or what is happening.
In other words, Combatant Commanders (CENTCOM, PACOM, etc) are directed to determine if climate change presents new risks or opportunities in their AOR. For instance, droughts could cause economic problems, refugee issues, or conflict over water. Floods could cause other problems. The littoral could change. Lines of Communication could be broken or made- areas that were once impassible may become passable and vice versa. Crops could die, floods could bring disease, changes to animal migratory habits could cause problems.
There is a wide recognition that this is an issue, particularly in the Pacific Rim. http://www.foxnews.com/world/2015/11/26/tiny-marshall-islands-face-global-warming-threat-as-world-leaders-seek-paris.html
Killjoy!!
I knew I should’ve read the links first. Thanks, that helps. Action and awareness at a strategic level makes a lot of sense,.. at a tactical level it makes none at all.
http://tidesandcurrents.noaa.gov/sltrends/sltrends_station.shtml?stnid=1820000
Interesting thing about the Marshall Islands…
Since 2010 sea level in the Marshall Islands has been FALLING not rising.
So, does this mean you’re going to buy that place in the Keys that you were looking at, after all?
From my initial post that created a shit storm of juvenile nonsense:
“The DoD has accepted climate change as a reality for more than a decade and has already been contingency planning for the consequences of the displaced population causing instability in regions.
This is real. And it is necessary to prepare for it because the consequences are already having destabilizing effects.”
You don’t know me, Commissar.
ipse dixit, jackass.
Ah yes. Allow me to introduce METT-TCEF
Mission, Enemy, Terrain, Troops, Time, Civilians (on the battlefield), Environmental (impact), Feelings (protection enemy & subordinates) = METT-TCEF
PS brought to you by Lars “the military’s purpose is not to kill people and break stuff” Taylor.
“not only…”
We are so full of ourselves. When this planet we live on decides we are causing too much change in her climate, she will reduce the number of humans living on her. Drastically.
She has her methods, and they work very well.
^^^^This!^^^^
Most climate science is akin to dogs barking at the moon. Anyone who really thinks we puny humans have control of anything on this planet isn’t paying attention.
He did not say humans were not causing climate change. He essentially said that we are full of ourselves if we think that it has anything to do with saving the Earth.
If things continue as they are the Earth will be fine, but with fewer humans.
And one can only hope that you’ll be one of the first to go, poodle.
And for your information, Pinto Nag is A SHE, you 1960s male chauvinist porker.
Would you like fries with that?
Lars taylor doesn’t know me.
In unrelated news, the USS Constitution is taking over as the USN Flagship, balloons are replacing fighter jets and DARPA is looking into genetically modified giant hamsters on giant running wheels to replace the turbine engine in the Abrams.
NOW can Lars be banned? The DRG is banned and Lars is just a similar pimple on the ass of society.
My post was legitimate.
Funny how I am the one being accused of trying to suppress the speech of people on this board. But who are the ones constantly calling for bans?
How many times have you asked that I be banned today?
Not enough.
Commissar does not know me.
What annex to oporders will be environmental
Isn’t it already an appendix in the Engineer annex?
This high and right response is the product of Frank Kendall; perhaps the worst product of West Point ever. I had the displeasure of jumping through his extra hoops for three years when he was under Ash Carter. Three years watching these guys enrich their buddies in the industry while cheating the war fighters out of desperately needed technology convinced me that I needed to leave the AT&L world.