Secret Report will humiliate Bush!

The Pentagon now tells Bush: climate change will destroy us!

It seems a secret report warns of rioting and nuclear war - Britain will be 'Siberian' in less than 20 years - Threat to the world is greater than terrorism -

A secret report, suppressed by US defense chiefs and obtained by The Observer, warns that major European cities will be sunk beneath rising seas as Britain is plunged into a 'Siberian' climate by 2020. Nuclear conflict, mega-droughts, famine and widespread rioting will erupt across the world.

The document predicts that abrupt climate change could bring the planet to the edge of anarchy as countries develop a nuclear threat to defend and secure dwindling food, water and energy supplies. The threat to global stability vastly eclipses that of terrorism, say the few experts privy to its contents. -

The findings will prove humiliating to the Bush administration, which has repeatedly denied that climate change even exists. Experts said that they will also make unsettling reading for a President who has insisted national defense is a priority.

The article link can be found here:

tvnewslies.org...

On Coast to Coast Art Bell was talking about something like this.

Originally posted by EricFM
On Coast to Coast Art Bell was talking about something like this.

He even wrote a book about the coming Ice Age apparently. He had this guy on who wrote a similar book a while ago. I agree, Ice Age is closer than we think, go see the movie.

[Edited on 21-2-2004 by TheCatalyst]

Yeah, they were saying on coast that this is the reason we went to war in Iraq. To grab power over the oil, etc...

pretty good conspiracy. tough to believe though.

Secret document? Like hell!

Try this story, minus the CIA and supposed incrimination of the Bush Administration, which was reported mid-Janruary of this year:

"Global warming will plunge Britain into new ice age 'within decades'"
news.independent.co.uk...

Article fails to mention that their information was obtained from a "secret document".........

"Britain is likely to be plunged into an ice age within our lifetime by global warming, new research suggests.

A study, which is being taken seriously by top government scientists, has uncovered a change "of remarkable amplitude" in the circulation of the waters of the North Atlantic.

Similar events in pre-history are known to have caused sudden "flips" of the climate, bringing ice ages to northern Europe within a few decades. The development - described as "the largest and most dramatic oceanic change ever measured in the era of modern instruments", by the US Woods Hole Oceanographic Institute, which led the research - threatens to turn off the Gulf Stream, which keeps Europe's weather mild.

If that happens, Britain and northern Europe are expected to switch abruptly to the climate of Labrador - which is on the same latitude - bringing a nightmare scenario where farmland turns to tundra and winter temperatures drop below -20C. The much-heralded cold snap predicted for the coming week would seem balmy by comparison.

A report by the International Geosphere-Biosphere Programme in Sweden - launched by Nobel prize-winner Professor Paul Crutzen and other top scientists - warned last week that pollution threatened to "trigger changes with catastrophic consequences" like these.

Scientists have long expected that global warming could, paradoxically, cause a devastating cooling in Europe by disrupting the Gulf Stream, which brings as much heat to Britain in winter as the sun does: the US National Academy of Sciences has even described such abrupt, dramatic changes as "likely". But until now it has been thought that this would be at least a century away.

The new research, by scientists at the Centre for Environment, Fisheries and Acquaculture Science at Lowestoft and Canada's Bedford Institute of Oceanography, as well as Woods Hole, indicates that this may already be beginning to happen.

Dr Ruth Curry, the study's lead scientist, says: "This has the potential to change the circulation of the ocean significantly in our lifetime. Northern Europe will likely experience a significant cooling."

Robert Gagosian, the director of Woods Hole, considered one of the world's leading oceanographic institutes, said: "We may be approaching a threshold that would shut down [the Gulf Stream] and cause abrupt climate changes.

"Even as the earth as a whole continues to warm gradually, large regions may experience a precipitous and disruptive shift into colder climates." The scientists, who studied the composition of the waters of the Atlantic from Greenland to Tierra del Fuego, found that they have become "very much" saltier in the tropics and subtropics and "very much" fresher towards the poles over the past 50 years.

This is alarming because the Gulf Stream is driven by cold, very salty water sinking in the North Atlantic. This pulls warm surface waters northwards, forming the current.

The change is described as the "fingerprint" of global warming. As the world heats up, more water evaporates from the tropics and falls as rain in temperate and polar regions, making the warm waters saltier and the cold ones fresher. Melting polar ice adds more fresh water.

Ominously, the trend has accelerated since 1990, during which time the 10 hottest years on record have occurred. Many studies have shown that similar changes in the waters of the North Atlantic in geological time have often plunged Europe into an ice age, sometimes bringing the change in as little as a decade.

The National Academy of Sciences says that the jump occurs in the same way as "the slowly increasing pressure of a finger eventually flips a switch and turns on a light". Once the switch has occurred the new, hostile climate, lasts for decades at least, and possibly centuries.

When the Gulf Stream abruptly turned off about 12,700 years ago, it brought about a 1,300-year cold period, known as the Younger Dryas. This froze Britain in continuous permafrost, drove summer temperatures down to 10C and winter ones to -20C, and brought icebergs as far south as Portugal. Europe could not sustain anything like its present population. Droughts struck across the globe, including in Asia, Africa and the American west, as the disruption of the Gulf Stream affected currents worldwide.

Some scientists say that this is the "worst-case scenario" and that the cooling may be less dramatic, with the world's climate "flickering" between colder and warmer states for several decades. But they add that, in practice, this would be almost as catastrophic for agriculture and civilisation."




As par, WE'RE ALL GOING TO DIE AND ITS ALL BUSH'S FAULT!

May want to read the report that was released by the International Geosphere-Biosphere Programme, in Sweden. It was launched by Nobel prize-winner Professor Paul Crutzen and a few other top scientists, that warned that pollution threatens to "trigger changes with catastrophic consequences" like the one mentioned in this article above. Nothing "secret", and nothing to hide or incriminate.

Here are some other reports:
"Abrupt Climate Change"
www.whoi.edu...

And a thread related to this:
"Global Warming Brings New Ice Age
Global warming will plunge Britain into new ice age 'within decades'"
www.abovetopsecret.com...


As to this administration "repeatedly deny[ing] that climate change even exists", I encourage you to use the ATS search and you will find various threads discussing the debatable issue of "global-warming".
Interesting that the "global-warming" issue is currently being debated on the scientific level.....



regards
seekerof

[Edited on 21-2-2004 by Seekerof]

Poor Bush, gets the blame for everything.

This is BS!

Why?

First of all, global warming is primarily caused by earth changes of which much of the scientific community is starting to admit too itself. Of course they don't fully know why we have these changes (or they don't admit to them).

Secondly, notice who is talking in this story, globalist controlled people whose job is to discredit Bush so the Democrats can win and force the US into the arms of the UN.

Lastly, despite what the article suggests, the white house is quite aware of how weather affects warfare and geopolitics having the pentagon investing in this very theme for decades.

The article beats around the bush' (LOL) so to speak because it does not call for immediate and total efforts to reduce greenhouse gases which the rest of the leftwing world has been trying to force the US to do for decades now. If the US did this it would lose its superpower status and in the end barely affect the outcomes that we are all about to face.

The best thing is for the US to stand its ground and remain the power in the world in the event that future events turn out as predicted here. In that event at least there would be the chance of order in the world by the existance of the independent US.

According to some books I've read recently, we're actually overdue for an Ice Age by a thousand years or more. That may seem rather extreme, but to put it in context, that's like one of us being a few seconds late for work in the morning. A thousand years (or more) in a timeline where you can look back for millions and millions is a drop in the proverbial bucket.

The cycle is starting to correct itself now though apparently, which is why we'll see movies on this topic, such as The Day After Tomorrow. This could be another example of the media and entertainment community being used to help prepare us for the possibilities, as discussed at this thread and I'm sure countless others.

While I'm not sure of the realities of that, it does make you think.

I just read the same type of article from here:

observer.guardian.co.uk...

What's really aggravating is that the Bush Administration chooses to bury evidence that doesn't look good on them. Then when decisions have to be made he favors the ones that make the oil companies bank account bigger. Maybe he's just expecting to die before any of this happens so he won't have to deal with it.

For almost two months last summer, Antarctica was reporting temperatures upwards of 30 degree celsius above observed historical averages. Climate change continues to change thermohaline circulation patterns in the Atlantic, which has historically triggered an Ice Age. They conveyor is real and yes it can turn off in an instance. Sedimentary studies for the last couple decades have proven this again and again. This is not stuff of science fiction and don't sit around for the politicians to debate it. IMHO, there's no reason to call for action, as we passed the Point of No Return in the previous decade. Your best bet is to relocate in an area with geothermals and begin the fortification procedures.

As far as the DOD leaking this report, it should be interesting to see Rove's reaction or inaction. The report doesn't seem to have hit the U.S. wires very hard.

If there is "another" Ice Age, I believe it will be bacause of weather modification.
Science, and the media, have not convinced me that the greenhouse effect exists. Sciend has not convinced me that the polar ice was a weather phenomena.
Since what Mars was like has a lot to do with what earth's history is, I wonder how much truth we will get from the Mars probe. [Ii have already heard those tech glitches are enabled so we won't see things they don't want us to see.]

Here's my thing with this supposed "secret document"....
WTF does the Pentagon know about "Global warming"...in such, "global warming" is going to cause a "'Siberian' climate" in Great Britain....we are talking "global warming" right?

Secondly, why is the Bush Administration being 'nailed' on this? Because they blew off the Kyoto? How come the previous presidential administration is not being 'nailed' or pin-pointed on this also....being the Senate single-handedly rejected Kyoto, 95-0, during the Clinton Administration? No mention of the "secret plans" for some of the other huge polluters: China and India?

Hell, while we're on this "sci-fi: Global Warming and the current Bush ADministration" conspiracy, lets throw in this report by the US Air Force while we're at it:

"Weather as a Force Multiplier: Owning the Weather in 2025"
www.au.af.mil...


How about this coincidence:





As for the "Guardian", these are the same people who released this so-called 'true' story also?
"Nip in the air as piranha drops in"
www.guardian.co.uk...

....300 people eaten by piranha's huh?


Again, as I posted before, all the facts need to be looked into:
www.whoi.edu...
www.whoi.edu...
www.whoi.edu...
www.whoi.edu...

BTW, when is that "secret document" due out on "Magnetic Pole Shifts and Volcanism" that will supposedly occur in 2012?




regards
seekerof

[Edited on 22-2-2004 by Seekerof]

Yes the solar cycle may have a great deal more to do with climate changes than the release of carbon dioxide from man made sources, which are hundred of millions of years old in the form of hydrocarbons.

The argument that Mt. St. Helens released more "pollution," than all the industrial activity of many years, is compelling.

Other volcanic activity is overwhelmingly higher. At the same time the destruction of the Brazilian Amazon is taking away the CO2 recycler from our planet.

It is the convergence of factors, solar amplitude changes, volcanic activity, and subsequent indicators as ocean currents, that creates an alarming synergy of factors as possibilities.

Narrowly blaming things on Bush is a scientific absurdity.

But there is no shortage of scientific absurdity these days, when so called science is conducted without adequate laboratory safeguards, broad based peer review and in abstensia of the latest "political theory," or shall we say "dogmatism." It is the same old issue, beliefs vs. facts.



[Edited on 22-2-2004 by SkipShipman]

Blaming Bush is a cop-out

That could not have been said better.

If there is a climate change, things will be different for about three years. Some crops will die, some people will die, and most everyone will freak out.

Me? I'll be in a cave in North Carolina with a nice fire and a loaded shotgun.

Besides, what are the odds of this actually happening? The article says the idea is "plausible", and such an event "would" do significant damage... "as early as" next year.

Now, "as early as next year" is a pretty vague statement. There are going to be a lot of years, if the past is any indication.

But that's just logic... what does it know?

I just realized that what we are do for is a nuclear holocaust. Be it initiated by the climate change, war, or whatever. We have the capability for a global nuclear catastrophe. I would take this story as well as the the threat of nuclear war very serously. Would anyone like to recommend any survival manuals?

has Bush been officially humiliated yet?

I haven't read this secret report info about the gulf stream shutting down but I do remember a discussion on this subject on either The Learning Channel or Discovery Channel several months ago.

The scientists reported that climate change could occur suddenly in the northern hemisphere. I believe the tv show reported a huge lake bigger than the great lakes combined broke an ice dam and flooded the atlantic causing a great shift in salinity. Supposedly this shut down the gulf stream causing an ice age. I look forward to hearing more info on how the gulf stream flow is currently slowing.

I would like to apologize to the people of this board that our leader cannot control the Sun and the Earth. He is such a bastard for that.

I don't see how this will humiliate Bush. What are you wanting from the man? Do you want him to find an intergalactic AC for the Earth? If this is true, and we are looking down the barrel of another Ice Age, all we could do is prepare ourselves.

btw, did anyone else see (and laugh at) the 'join sierra club' banner ad on that link??

this doomsday stuff has always been BS. I mean, should we sign up for Kyote right now? Would that keep Britain safe in 2020?? I know, the Uk helped the US in Iraq only so the US would sign Kyote, thereby saving the UK from a siberian climate! yes, that's it!

And, is this global warming or 'climate change' (for the colder)? Britain, according to this report will have a siberian climate? I dont understand?

Look, after last months heating bill I'd welcome some global warming. lol


[Edited on 23-2-2004 by Bob88]

Climate Model Predicts Even Hotter Summers
Belle Dum�, Science Writer at PhysicsWeb, 23 January 2004, physicsweb.org...

The record-breaking heat wave that affected much of Europe in the summer of 2003 "took place 50 years too early" according to a Swiss climate scientist. Martin Beniston of the University of Fribourg says that last year's heat wave was not like those that occurred in 1947 and 1976, and more like the conditions that might be expected towards the end of this century. He hopes that governments will use the heat wave as an indication of "a shape of things to come" to devise new strategies for coping with future climate change and global warming (M Beniston 2004 Geophys. Res. Lett. 31 L02202).

Beniston used the HIRHAM regional climate model developed by the Danish Meteorological Institute to run two 30-year simulations. The "current climate" simulation was run for the period from 1961 to 1990, while the "greenhouse-gas climate" simulation covered from 2071 to 2100.

For both periods, Beniston first studied the fluctuations in the daily maximum summer temperatures in Basel - a town in northwest Switzerland that is close to the French and German borders - averaged over July, August and September. He also analyzed the number of days in which temperatures exceeded 30�C. He found that 2003 was clearly the hottest summer since 1901.

He then extended the model to different parts of Europe and found that in the latter half of this century, summer temperatures would increase across much of the continent leading to a "northward shift" in climatic zones. This means that Switzerland could have a climate similar to that in the South of France today.


Beniston observed a general increase of about 4�C in a band stretching across central Europe to the Black Sea, with greater increases over the Iberian Peninsula and the south west of France. Moreover, he found that the number of hot days would increase - particularly in the Mediterranean region and in Eastern Europe - with an additional 40 to 60 days or more above 30�C (see figure). In comparison, the period 1961 to 1990 saw an average of around 10 days.

"Perhaps the media attention given to these and similar results might motivate policy-makers to start thinking about the long term - and the implications of such climate change on health, water availability and quality, food security and so on," Beniston told PhysicsWeb.
____________________________________________

Glaciers and Sea Ice Endangered by Rising Temperatures
Janet Larsen, Earth-Policy News, January 22, 2004, www.earth-policy.org...

By 2020, the snows of Kilimanjaro may exist only in old photographs. The
glaciers in Montana's Glacier National Park could disappear by 2030. And by
mid-century, the Arctic Sea may be completely ice-free during summertime. As
the earth's temperature has risen in recent decades, the earth's ice cover
has begun to melt. And that melting is accelerating.

In both 2002 and 2003, the Northern Hemisphere registered record-low sea ice
cover. New satellite data show the Arctic region warming more during the
1990s than during the 1980s, with Arctic Sea ice now melting by up to 15
percent per decade. The long-sought Northwest Passage, a dream of early
explorers, could become our nightmare. The loss of Arctic Sea ice could
alter ocean circulation patterns and trigger changes in global climate
patterns.

On the opposite end of the globe, Southern Ocean sea ice floating near
Antarctica has shrunk by some 20 percent since 1950. This unprecedented
melting of sea ice corroborates records showing that the regional air
temperature has increased by 2.5 degrees Celsius (4.5 degrees Fahrenheit)
since 1950.

Antarctic ice shelves that existed for thousands of years are crumbling. One
of the world's largest icebergs, named B-15, that measured near 10,000
square kilometers (4,000 square miles) or half the size of New Jersey,
calved off the Ross Ice Shelf in March 2000. In May 2002, the shelf lost
another section measuring 31 kilometers (19 miles) wide and 200 kilometers
(124 miles) long.

Elsewhere on Antarctica, the Larsen Ice Shelf has largely disintegrated
within the last decade, shrinking to 40 percent of its previously stable
size. Following the break-off of the Larsen A section in 1995 and the
collapse of Larsen B in early 2002, melting of the nearby land-based
glaciers that the ice shelves once supported has more than doubled.

Unlike the melting of sea ice or the floating ice shelves along coasts, the
melting of ice on land raises sea level. Recent studies showing the
worldwide acceleration of glacier melting indicate that the
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change's estimate for sea level rise this
century--ranging from 0.1 meters to 0.9 meters--will need to be revised
upwards. (See www.earth-policy.org... for
selected examples of ice melt from around the world.)

On Greenland, an ice-covered island three times the size of Texas,
once-stable glaciers are now melting at a quickening rate. The Jakobshavn
Glacier on the island's southwest coast, which is one of the major drainage
outlets from the interior ice sheet, is now thinning four times faster than
during most of the twentieth century. Each year Greenland loses some 51
cubic kilometers of ice, enough to annually raise sea level 0.13
millimeters. Were Greenland's entire ice sheet to melt, global sea level
could rise by a startling 7 meters (23 feet), inundating most of the world's
coastal cities.

The Himalayas contain the world's third largest ice mass after Antarctica
and Greenland. Most Himalayan glaciers have been thinning and retreating
over the past 30 years, with losses accelerating to alarming levels in the
past decade. On Mount Everest, the glacier that ended at the historic base
camp of Edmund Hillary and Tenzing Norgay, the first humans to reach the
summit, has retreated 5 kilometers (3 miles) since their 1953 ascent.
Glaciers in Bhutan are retreating at an average rate of 30-40 meters a year.
A similar situation is found in Nepal.

As the glaciers melt they are rapidly filling glacial lakes, creating a
flood risk. An international team of scientists has warned that with current
melt rates, at least 44 glacial lakes in the Himalayas could burst their
banks in as little as five years.

Glaciers themselves store vast quantities of water. More than half of the
world's population relies on water that originates in mountains, coming from
rainfall runoff or ice melt. In some areas glaciers help sustain a constant
water supply; in others, meltwater from glaciers is a primary water source
during the dry season. In the short term, accelerated melting means that
more water feeds rivers. Yet as glaciers disappear, dry season river flow
declines.

The Himalayan glaciers feed the seven major rivers of Asia--the Ganges,
Indus, Brahmaputra, Salween, Mekong, Yangtze, and Huang He (Yellow)--and
thus contribute to the year-round water supply of a vast population. In
India alone, some 500 million people, including those in New Delhi and
Calcutta, depend on glacier meltwater that feeds into the Ganges River
system. Glaciers in Central Asia's Tien Shan Mountains have shrunk by nearly
30 percent between 1955 and 1990. In arid western China, shrinking glaciers
account for at least 10 percent of freshwater supplies.

The largest aggregation of tropical glaciers is in the northern Andes. The
retreat of the Qori Kalis Glacier on the west side of the Quelccaya Ice Cap
that stretches across Peru has accelerated to 155 meters a year between 1998
and 2000-three times faster than during the previous three-year period. The
entire ice cap could vanish over the next two decades.

The Antizana Glacier, which provides Quito, Ecuador, with almost half its
water, has retreated more than 90 meters over the last eight years. The
Chacaltaya Glacier near La Paz, Bolivia, melted to 7 percent of its 1940s
volume by 1998. It could disappear entirely by the end of this decade,
depriving the 1.5 million people in La Paz and the nearby city of Alto of an
important source of water and power.

Africa's glaciers are also disappearing. Across the continent, mountain
glaciers have shrunk to one third their size over the twentieth century. On
Kenya's Kilimanjaro, ice cover has shrunk by more than 33 percent since
1989. By 2020 it could be completely gone.

In Western Europe, glacial area has shrunk by up to 40 percent and glacial
volume by more than half since 1850. If temperatures continue to rise at
recent rates, major sections of glaciers covering the Alps and the French
and Spanish Pyrenees could be gone in the next few decades. During the
record-high temperature summer of 2003, some Swiss glaciers retreated by an
unprecedented 150 meters. The United Nations Environment Programme is
warning that for this region long associated with ice and snow, warming
temperatures signify the demise of a popular ski industry, not to mention a
cultural identity.

Boundaries around Banff, Yoho, and Jasper National Parks in the Canadian
Rockies cannot stop the melting of the glaciers there. Glacier National Park
in Montana has lost over two thirds of its glaciers since 1850. If
temperatures continue to rise, it may lose the remainder by 2030.

In just the past 30 years, the average temperature in Alaska climbed more
than 3 degrees Celsius (5 degrees Fahrenheit)-easily four times the global
increase. Glaciers in all of Alaska's 11 glaciated mountain ranges are
shrinking. Since the mid-1990s, Alaskan glaciers have been thinning by 1.8
meters a year, more than three times as fast as during the preceding 40
years.

The global average temperature has climbed by 0.6 degrees Celsius (1 degree
Fahrenheit) in the past 25 years. Over this time period, melting of sea ice
and mountain glaciers has increased dramatically. During this century,
global temperature may rise between 1.4 and 5.8 degrees Celsius, and melting
will accelerate further. Just how much will depend in part on the energy
policy choices made today.
_____________________________________________
Greenhouse Gases
To the Editor, NY Times, January 31, 2004

In "Warming Up" (editorial, Jan. 25), you say that "a Washington Post survey found that only a tiny number of American companies" have agreed to participate in voluntary programs to curb greenhouse gas emissions.

In fact, trade associations representing thousands of companies from 12 energy-intensive industry sectors � accounting for about 40 to 45 percent of United States greenhouse gas emissions � now participate in the administration's Climate Vision program. Nearly all these organizations have made specific commitments on behalf of their members to reduce greenhouse gas emissions intensity.

The administration has made significant efforts to reduce greenhouse emissions over the longer term. To meet the energy demand of a growing world population, lift people out of poverty and stabilize atmospheric greenhouse gas concentrations, new low- or zero-emission technologies must be created and adopted by the market. The United States is leading the way in developing transformational technologies in carbon sequestration, hydrogen, renewable energy, nuclear fission and fusion.