SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : The Exxon Free Environmental Thread -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Mac Con Ulaidh who wrote (4357)10/7/2009 12:14:29 AM
From: Wharf Rat  Respond to of 49090
 
Barrasso seeks to block intelligence on climate change threat
Posted 7:58 AM on 5 Oct 2009
by Joseph Romm

Last year, Thomas Fingar, then the U.S. intelligence community’s top analyst, warned that climate change is among the gravest threats to U.S. national security (see here). This year, John Warner, the former (GOP) chair of the Senate Armed Services committee has been repeating the same warning to anyone who would listen (see here).

But some Senate conservatives are deaf to the facts, as E&E News (subs. req’d) reports.

The Senate may vote tomorrow on whether to block funds for a new Central Intelligence Agency program to assess the national security implications of climate change.
Sen. John Barrasso (R-Wyo.) is offering an amendment to the fiscal 2010 defense spending bill that would bar funding for the Center on Climate Change and National Security launched last month.
The center will examine the national security impact of changes such as desertification, rising sea levels and greater competition for natural resources.
Here is Barrasso’s justification, which is intentionally mocking and unintentionally self-mocking [from E&E News (subs. req’d)]:

“We have threats from around the world. The most immediate of these threats is the prevention of future terrorist attacks on U.S. soil. I do not believe that creating a Center on Climate Change is going to prevent one terrorist attack,” Barrasso said yesterday.
“Will someone sitting in a dark room watching satellite video of northern Afghanistan now be sitting in a dark room watching polar ice caps?” he said.
First off, is Barrasso really saying that the entire mission of the Central intelligence Agency is preventing terrorist attacks? Although he sits on the Foreign Relations Committee, he apparently has no conception of what the CIA does. He strikes me as one of those guys who in the 1990s probably wanted to block the CIA from looking into terrorism, since that was not going to prevent one communist attack on us.

Second, although he sits on the Environment and Public Works Committee, he apparently missed all the hearings about climate impacts and how they pose a major national security threat to us—and yes, will help create conditions that foster terrorism. In fact, an unusually savvy new intelligence forecast reported last year should have served as a wake-up call for the largely clueless Establishment:

He [Fingar] said U.S. intelligence agencies accepted the consensual scientific view of global warming, including the conclusion that it is too late to avert significant disruption over the next two decades. The conclusions are in line with an intelligence assessment produced this summer that characterized global warming as a serious security threat for the coming decades.
Floods and droughts will trigger mass migrations and political upheaval in many parts of the developing world.
So by all means, let’s ban the CIA from pursuing this issue, even in the most modest way:

The CIA, in announcing the center Sept. 25, called it a “small unit” led by senior specialists from the agency’s Directorate of Intelligence and the Directorate of Science and Technology.
Its mission does not include climate science. Instead, the agency said it would review the national security impact of changes such as desertification, rising sea levels and greater competition for natural resources. The information it provides will help policymakers craft, implement and verify international environmental agreements, it said.
Its work will also include reviewing and declassifying images and data that could help scientists in their climate research, the CIA said. “This effort draws on imagery and other information that is collected in any event, assisting the U.S. scientific community without a large commitment of resources,” the agency summary of the new unit says.
Fortunately, not everyone in the Senate has a flatlining EEG.

Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.), chairwoman of the Select Committee on Intelligence, urged colleagues to oppose Barrasso’s amendment and called the new CIA center “entirely appropriate.” She said it can bolster the agency’s valuable role in declassifying imagery that is important to climate change scientists, among other benefits.
Feinstein said it would play a valuable role in ensuring the integrity of an international climate agreement. “It will help the administration design verification regimes for any climate change treaties so policymakers can negotiate from a position of strength. This is, in fact, a traditional role for the intelligence community on a wide range of foreign policy issues,” she said on the floor yesterday.
Feinstein also called the CIA’s work in analyzing the security risks of climate change important, stating that the intelligence community is well-positioned for this and that the CIA’s contacts in the academic and think tank worlds will pay “big dividends.”
Duh.

Let me end with more from last year’s Fingar story:

An intelligence forecast being prepared for the next president on future global risks envisions a steady decline in U.S. dominance in the coming decades, as the world is reshaped by globalization, battered by climate change, and destabilized by regional upheavals over shortages of food, water and energy.
The report, previewed in a speech by Thomas Fingar, the U.S. intelligence community’s top analyst, also concludes that the one key area of continued U.S. superiority — military power — will “be the least significant” asset in the increasingly competitive world of the future, because “nobody is going to attack us with massive conventional force.”
And yet the federal government spends more than $500 billion a year on military security, and maybe one percent of that on climate or energy security. Fingar is a remarkably broad thinking guy, which may well be why he was our top intelligence analyst. He has the kind of reality-based alarmism that inevitably comes from the genuine understanding of the facts of global warming:

The predicted shift toward a less U.S.-centric world will come at a time when the planet is facing a growing environmental crisis, caused largely by climate change, Fingar said. By 2025, droughts, food shortages and scarcity of fresh water will plague large swaths of the globe, from northern China to the Horn of Africa.
For poorer countries, climate change “could be the straw that breaks the camel’s back,” Fingar said, while the United States will face “Dust Bowl” conditions in the parched Southwest.
Always glad to see somebody serious understands what is coming (see “NOAA stunner: Climate change “largely irreversible for 1000 years,” with permanent Dust Bowls in Southwest and around the globe“).

Let’s hope some sanity prevails in the Senate. We cannot afford to embrace the conservative policy of unilaterally disarming in the face of this gravest of threats.
grist.org



To: Mac Con Ulaidh who wrote (4357)10/7/2009 12:33:05 AM
From: Wharf Rat  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 49090
 
I caught a show on History Channel about the geology of Loch Ness. Back in the day, we used to own Scotland.

S01E04 - Loch Ness
Home to the legend of the Loch Ness Monster, this lake holds more water than any other lake in Britain. It's only 10,000 years old, but billions of years in the making. Trace the extraordinary story of Loch Ness: from the three billion year old bedrock of Northern Scotland, to the giant glaciers that carved out the Loch. On this incredible journey we reveal that Loch Ness was once part of America, giant dinosaurs, suspiciously similar to the fabled monster once roamed the area, and that the entire region was engulfed by huge volcanic eruptions as Scotland was ripped from its birth place on the American continent . Could the mythical Loch Ness monster be a descendant of the dinosaurs, somehow surviving in the murky waters of the loch?*
downarchive.com

One of the most amazing facts about our geological past is that Scotland was separated from England and Wales during much of their early history by an ocean, once as wide as the North Atlantic. This ocean, named Iapetus after the father of Atlas, has of course long disappeared, but it existed between about 570 and 430 million years ago. At that time Scotland was still part of North America - the Laurentian continent - and lay south of the equator. The seaway which existed between the converging continents narrowed until they collided and subsequently mountains were created in place of the vanished ocean. Scotland still carries the legacy of these events. The Highlands are the eroded roots of that mountain belt formed when these continents collided.

Since late Devonian times Scotland has drifted progressively northwards through equitorial latitudes with various global dancing partners. Up to Jurassic times it formed part of large continental masses called Laurussia and Pangaea. Pangaea was a global supercontinent which only began to break up in the Jurassic with the opening of the central part of the embryo Atlantic Ocean. Scotland subsequently joined its current continental companions, collectively called Eurasia only some 65 million years ago. At that time, opening of the northern part of the Atlantic Ocean caused it to drift eastwards away from America, Canada and Greenland, to whom it had been attached for the previous 1000 million years. The separation was marked by great outpourings of basalt lavas.

snh.org.uk

*Spoiler alert...no; Loch Ness is only 10,000 years old. Dinos extinctified 65 M years ago.