Pentagon tells Bush: Climate Change Will Destroy Us

The Observer (UK) ^ | Sunday February 22, 2004 | Mark Townsend and Paul Harris

[old3030]

I agree completely that ice melting off of the continents or the land mass of Greenland would add somewhat to the volume of water in the oceans. But there is already a lot of ice in the water. I have no idea what the actual volume is and whether or not one would offset the other.

Weren't portions of Greenland supposed to have been more temperate about a thousand years ago?

[tractorman]

I think I read the same article in The Weekly World News.

[LN2Campy]

It sounds odd, but a warming of the earth's climate overall COULD result in Northern Europe becoming much colder--the reason being that the massive melting of polar and Greenlandic glaciers would pour a lot of cold water into the Atlantic, resulting in a shift/weakening of the Gulf Stream, thus resuting in colder weather for Britain, Northwestern Europe and Iceland.

That being said, this article is an offensive misrepresentation of what was simply a disaster scenario projection and NOT a climatological study.

[LN2Campy]

Yes, the Norse settled Greenland around that time and were able to graze cattle and sheep, and even raise some cereal crops. Iceland was also much warmer then (and actually forested), and grapes were being grown throughout Britain.

The cooling of the climate from about 1300 until 1700 or so (the "little ice age") is credited with the extinguishing of the Greenland Norse.

All goes to show the wide, normal and natural variations of climate throughout history.

[Jakenuts]

Hmmm... dunno. I suspect all these cycles have happened a number of times and that on our small time-scale it looks like a huge deal, but in the earths time-scale it is like watching the tide at the beach. I'm sad to hear that cold is the likely outcome of all this though as I've always considered Global Warming's best attribute that it would get warmer around here. Quite enough of winter...

[justshutupandtakeit]

Environmentalism is ALREADY a national security threat. Our military is constrained from training by "endangered species' habitat" by "wetlands destruction" and other issues.

The question the believers in global warming can never answer is "Who decides WHAT the temperature of the world SHOULD be?" And "How do you deal with the 95+% of greenhouse gases not generated by Man?"

PS that article is all over the lot and is totally unconvincing.

[bondjamesbond]

What a surprise! The Pentagon does a study based on some scenario or another and concludes that the future will be very unstable, so it is critical that we have a lot more bombs, guns, and SDI. Isn't that their answer to every question?

Not that it isn't the right answer from time to time, mind you...

[bondjamesbond]

If the glacier is resting on land, then any melting would definitely add to the water in the seas and would account for sea-level rising, no?

Do not assume that the Earth's crust is rigid. The Earth's crust is more like the crust on top of a pie than a stone sphere. If the ice cap melts off of Greenland, then that land mass will "float" higher on the visco-elastic magma and the seas will fall slightly. I'm not saying it will all come out in the wash, but it's not like pushing water around on your kitchen counter, either...