It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Senator: Navy Evaluates Commanders Based On Climate Change Views

page: 2
<< 1    3 >>

log in


posted on Jul, 1 2016 @ 10:03 PM

Secretary of the Navy Ray Mabus is starting to evaluate commanders based on their knowledge of how global warming will impact the bases they command. well they communicate the risk of climate change about the base,

IOW will base commanders support U.S. NAVY CLIMATE CHANGE ROADMAP...pdf. (from 2010) Seems reasonable to be a part of their eval.

Climate change may influence the type, scope, and location of future Navy missions through its effects on the distribution and availability of natural resources (e.g., water, agriculture, fisheries, coastal areas, etc.). Economically unstable regions will be more vulnerable to the effects of climate change, and climate change will be one of several
factors that may increase instability.

Climate change is affecting, and will continue to affect, U.S. military installations world- wide. Melting permafrost is degrading road s, foundations, and structures on DoD and USCG installations in Alaska. Droughts in the southeast and southwest U.S. are challenging water resource management. Sea level rise and storm surge will lead to an increased likelihood of inundation of coastal infrastructure, and may limit the availability of overseas bases.

And that's just the tip of the iceberg of the report.
edit on 1-7-2016 by desert because: add "pdf" 2010

posted on Jul, 1 2016 @ 10:12 PM
a reply to: pl3bscheese

Bah. What's the point

edit on 1-7-2016 by Shamrock6 because: (no reason given)

posted on Jul, 1 2016 @ 10:34 PM

originally posted by: pl3bscheese
a reply to: Teikiatsu

Look, it's no secret that most people who are in the military are very dumb, your average officer a bit less so.

Does that mean that the average officer is merely dumb? I think that there are many on this site who would disagree with you. Perhaps you are suffering from an inflated ego or just like to underestimate others as part of your general fantasy about your importance in the world.

posted on Jul, 1 2016 @ 10:38 PM

originally posted by: pl3bscheese
Now, I know you think I'm buying into nonsense,

I suspected that at first, but then it was confirmed when you said people in the military are very dumb.
edit on 1-7-2016 by Teikiatsu because: (no reason given)

posted on Jul, 1 2016 @ 11:03 PM
a reply to: DBCowboy

Rhode Island Democratic Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse recently told people gathered in New York City that global warming “denial” hurts U.S. soldiers in the field and that the “main problem” with the military is its reluctance to join the climate crusade.

Why yes!

Because dropping nukes,bunker busters, cluster bombs,explosives, and the REST of what the MILITARY does isn't harmful to the planet is the LEAST!

That ranks right up there with that other democrat that thought Guam might tip over.

posted on Jul, 1 2016 @ 11:24 PM
a reply to: DBCowboy
There's no belief involved, only science.

How hot should the Earth be, and how hot is it?


posted on Jul, 2 2016 @ 01:05 AM
a reply to: pl3bscheese

That's one hell of an asinine statement.

posted on Jul, 2 2016 @ 01:40 AM
a reply to: DBCowboy

It doesn't matter, the young smart and capable make things happen in the military. I often hear about how no one in the ranks do not step up and do something. That is false, Its the lance corporals, the E-3s in the infantry, the staff sergeants the tech sarge and the petty officer that do the grimy #, they make the hard moral choices. No one cares about climate change, # floating in space we as earth sent up there poises a greater danger then the climate, admirals know it, seems like a cop out to get on that ho train.

posted on Jul, 2 2016 @ 10:43 AM
It makes sense that Navy personel and top brass are aware of how climate change and rising sea levels are going to affect their bases which are on the coast. From the article:

“And, for those bases, for Navy bases particularly, it’s a really real risk,” Whitehouse said. “They’re on the sea. Sea level rise is going to swamp what they do. It’s really practical."

posted on Jul, 2 2016 @ 10:54 AM
I'm seeing that people who are for this, don't see it as authoritarian in nature or just refuse to accept that it is authoritarian.

Who cares what anyone "believes"?

Just do your damned job.

But that's not good enough anymore. Somehow, now, you must accept this ideology, this theory as fact.

I imagine that there would be an uproar if leadership was based on the belief of Christianity.

But this? Everyone is for.

posted on Jul, 2 2016 @ 11:10 AM
a reply to: DBCowboy

This senator is a buffoon, that doesn't subscribe to the Church of Climatology per say, but he is behind the "Anthropogenic global warming hypothesis".

He waits for disasters to happen to cash out on the occasion to push his hypothesis,

Anthropogenic global warming is a hypothesis, a theory – not proven fact supportable by direct observation. All of the projected outcomes exist only as the output of inadequate computer models using flawed assumptions and highly-manipulated data. With most models unable to account for the conditions of the last eighteen years and the continuing rise of atmospheric carbon dioxide. Not to mention that one of those global carbon dioxide measurements is made next to an active volcano spewing carbon dioxide into the atmosphere.)

He has given more than 100 clima change speeches, what that tells you, his agenda on clima change have to do with deep pockets.


posted on Jul, 2 2016 @ 11:11 AM
Global warming is truly baseless money scam and fear mongering.

Anyone here remember this gem of a prediction?

In 2005 the UN predicted 50 million climate refugees by 2010

Rising sea levels, desertification and shrinking freshwater supplies will create up to 50 million environmental refugees by the end of the decade, experts warn today. Janos Bogardi, director of the Institute for Environment and Human Security at the United Nations University in Bonn, said creeping environmental deterioration already displaced up to 10 million people a year, and the situation would get worse

When it didn't come true in 2011 they tried to delete the statistics from the official UNEP website.

Six years ago, the United Nations issued a dramatic warning that the world would have to cope with 50 million climate refugees by 2010. But now that those migration flows have failed to materialize, the UN has distanced itself from the forecasts. On the contrary, populations are growing in the regions that had been identified as environmental danger zones

Feared Migration Hasn't Happened

Yes. Believe in those pro global warming scientists all you want, but don't be surprised when nothing really happens.

posted on Jul, 2 2016 @ 11:39 AM
Don't SOLDIERS have OTHER things to worry about on the battlefield ?

Oh say like bullets,RPGS, and IED's ?

But what do i know.

posted on Jul, 2 2016 @ 11:49 AM
a reply to: neo96

Given that (apparently) the common soldier is too stupid to know any better, the politicians now feel that officers who embrace their ideology need to be in place to teach them.

posted on Jul, 2 2016 @ 11:57 AM
This reminds me of the "political officer" that used to be attached to Soviet units before the fall of communist USSR.

posted on Jul, 2 2016 @ 12:05 PM
a reply to: DBCowboy

That sounds like the beginning of a cult, get the military to enforce the global warming agenda so when they dispatch into the community in US soil they will be able to go after those pesky citizens that do not believe in all the global warming scam.

yes Im been sarcastic.

posted on Jul, 2 2016 @ 12:17 PM
From 2007, but in 2004 the military "contemplated the implications of climate change".

report ...lays out a detailed case for how global warming could destabilize vulnerable states in Africa and Asia and drive a flood of migrants to richer countries. It focuses on how climate change "can act as a threat multiplier for instability in some of the most volatile regions of the world," in part by causing water shortages and damaging food production.


That ain't no report, that's a prediction from some crazy crystal ball!

back to the Navy...

Nowhere is the Earth’s climate changing more dramatically than in the Arctic. The U.S. is an Arctic nation and the Navy must be prepared to respond to the changes in this region. In the coming decades, the Arctic Ocean will be increasingly accessible and more broadly used by Arctic and non-Arctic nations seeking the region’s abundant resources and trade routes.

The Navy views the Arctic as a challenge, not a crisis, and acknowledges that the risk of conflict is low in the region; however, the Navy must consider responses to the changing Arctic environment from many different nations.


oh, no, not the Army, too!

Army Technical Bulletin MED 507 spells out various temperature categories and the level of intensity of activity that can safely be performed during those temperature conditions. A "Category IV" temperature condition, for instance, is defined as being between 88-89.9 degrees. A "Category V" temperature condition is above 90 degrees.
Citing a temperature chart for Fort Stewart, Georgia, Kidd said "if you take a middle-road estimate of future climate change, we're going to go from around 80 days a year of Category IV or Category V weather to 130 days a year of Category IV and Category V."....
"Can we really train Soldiers if roughly half of our training days are going to be Category IV or Category V, where we have to curtail or eliminate their outdoor activity?" he asked.


and in general...

Potential effects of climate change on DOD:
More frequent disaster relief demands
Uptick of military activity in the Arctic
Rising international instability
Increased number of “black flag” suspended outdoor training days
Increased threats to endangered species on DOD installations
Increased erosion and flooding
Greater heating and cooling requirements in buildings
Additional maintenance for runways and roads during hot weather
Greater need for weapons and equipment maintenance or repair
Interrupted shipments of materials and supplies


sounds like planning is needed.... but....

Not everyone agrees. The topic that in recent years has raised the hackles of conservatives in Congress, some of whom regard global warming as a hoax, and object to the price tag of DOD efforts to develop new, non-petroleum-based fuels. A byproduct of overall energy efficiency efforts, DOD officials say, will be a reduction in greenhouse gas emissions.

In May 2012, Sen. James Inhofe, R-Okla., criticized then-Defense Secretary Leon Panetta’s support of a Navy biofuels program, saying Panetta “doesn’t need to waste his time trying to perpetrate President Obama’s global warming fantasies or his ongoing war on affordable energy.”

Well, looky that, there's opposition from an oil state to our military... and it ain't a Arab oil state ither...
edit on 2-7-2016 by desert because: oops 2007

posted on Jul, 7 2016 @ 08:37 PM
Now climate change is our biggest threat? What I remember from history, the military has always been at odds, when not used to its advanced in some situations, with fog, rain, wind, mud, freezing cold, burning desserts, and you get the point. Dealing with the elements, moving equipment, and dealing with sickness is new and unexpected?

posted on Jul, 7 2016 @ 08:52 PM
a reply to: Gin

Your comment is based on fantasy and a bogus claim that think tanks who are funded by oil companies push in order to preserve the profits and control that industry has on this planet.

Your B$ claim contradicts what we are observing.

Go ahead and pretend the science is not true, a claim you make without ANY evidence to counter what the vast majority of scientists and the observations are telling us.

posted on Jul, 8 2016 @ 02:09 AM
a reply to: jrod

The earth's climate has changed over and over from its conception. In a universe were a radiation burst or asteroid could end life on earth, you worry the earth might heat up or cool down as it has done without humankind. If climate change was not about the NWO / redistribution of wealth, and making the earth a better place for all, more would get on board. How is leveling whole mountains to obtain rare earth elementals for new technology using diesel equipment helping?

new topics

top topics

<< 1    3 >>

log in