How? is climate going to attack us…nuke us? Hold Americans against their will?
3 Likes
You seem to have a very narrow definition of national security.
It has long since stopped being a strictly military affair, but in terms of the military, the melting of the arctic ice referenced above seems a pretty striking example of a new national security issue caused by climate change.
Several countries, including the U.S., Russia, and NATO allies have claims up there.
You do realize that naturally occurring volcanic activity dwarfs the emissions of human activity.
2 Likes
Sounds to me they’re justifiably their existence at expense of American people.
Come on man…you’re better then this buying into there BS.
2 Likes
Oh and Wiki?
No I have a keen understanding of the difference between theoretical future threats and actual (as measured by IOH indicators) near term threats.
Oh, and conflict in the Arctic will be over the right to exploit resources on the sea floor, not about whether the surface was clear of Ice, or not.
Time to cap those volcanoes!
Google “what is national security”. You’ll find a bunch of articles, I only posted because it was clear and concise. In any event, you seem to be alone in this narrow definition you have. It turns out that national security has meant more than just military might for decades now.
Perhaps you are confusing it, or conflating it with “national defense”.
Climate change opened the seas for the conflict. In addition, the melted ice opens up a new naval theater.
Perhaps you as well are confusing or conflating “national security” with “national defense”.
If conflict occurs in the Arctic it will be caused by the ability to access the resources, not because of what made access possible. Right now deep water exploitation requires surface ships. It won’t always require that. Just as the development of nuclear propulsion opened up the waters under the Arctic to military submarine activity, future deep water tech will allow sustained submerged exploration and exploitation. Submerged operations don’t care about what condition the surface is in. It is the ability to access, not what makes access possible that opens the area to conflict.
federally mandated polar bear life jackets need to be mass produced and delivered
One side of the planet is burning the planet, the other side of the planet is pointing the fingers at themselves.
2 Likes
That is pointless hair splitting.
Anyway, thanks for the conversation.
Gee, if only the US government hadn’t banned solid hydrogen technology for a decade.
1 Like
You do realize naturally occurring volcanic activity has been part of the atmospheric system for eons?
What happened when naturally occurring anomalies like super volcanic explosions or meteor strikes released hither too unseen amounts of particulates into the atmosphere?
Those events are analogous to the hither to unseen amounts of gasses human activity is introducing into the delicate system.
Now that is a good one. You asserted that man made industrial activity is releasing gases into the atmosphere greater that any natural process. So once the exaggeration of your assertion is pointed out suddenly all that volcanic activity is a steady baseline to be ignored. Except when a new eruption occurs, that eruption dwarfs man’s input from industry. And, of course, the number of ongoing eruptions ebb and flow over time, and are not a constant. This weak argument does not make Climate Change equal to a very near term and measurable growing military threat.
Perhaps I am not expressing myself clearly.
Let me try again-
Earths atmospheric system prior to the industrialization of the human species - call it 150 years ago: This system included volcanic activity that ebbed and flowed as our planet cools, but stays fairly predictable. This activity is o course inside the complex system, and that system has, over eons, adapted to handle these emissions.
We know the system itself is fragile. When anomalies happen - like super volcanic explosions like Yellowstone (about every 200K years) or meteor strikes like the Yukatan peninsula - these events throw the system for catastrophic loops, and it take hundreds of thousands, sometimes millions, of years for the system to return to conditions favorable for thriving life.
These anamolies - occurring hundreds of thousands of years apart - are outside the equilibrium of the system as they simply don’t happen frequently enough.
Similarly, human industrialized activity is outside the system as well. It has never occurred before on earth.
Since we know events outside the system can wreck the system, it stands to reason human activity can wreck the system.
Does that make my point clearer?
1 Like
No they aren’t.
Manipulators: “Climate change is now a national security threat!”
Idiots with a new bottle of snake oil: “OMG! Climate change is a national security threat!”
2 Likes
Climate Change is sitting on some rock somewhere. You can even go up and punch him in the face. 
2 Likes
