Think Freely Media presents Common Sense with Paul Jacob

The Military vs. Weather

The purpose of a military — unless invading places for the hell of it — is to wield violence against violent threats to your country. What else are all the tanks and guns for?

The putative threats haven’t normally included . . . the weather.

But that’s been changing.

We probably shouldn’t be surprised to learn that Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel is on board with scare-mongering about catastrophic “climate change,” supposedly wrought by mankind’s industrial contributions of carbon to the atmosphere. But Chuck needs to study harder if he thinks that hurricanes, tornadoes, and other rotten weather — or, for that matter, changes in average global temperature — are anything new on this planet.

He also credulously accepts the most dire predictions about melting glaciers, rising sea levels, islands sinking under the ocean, rising emigration and global unrest, etc. And without a touch of irony avers that we must be “clear-eyed” about “the security threats presented by climate change, and . . . proactive in addressing them.”

How are soldiers supposed to “address” variations in weather except, like all of us, by proactively wearing coats, carrying umbrellas, turning on air conditioning, moving away from eroding shorelines, building arks, etc?

Drop bombs on coal plants?

Not quite.

Secretary Hagel wants defense ministers to start attending UN climate-change conferences, for starters.

In other news, scientists say the rate at which plants are absorbing carbon dioxide (green things love the stuff) has been substantially underestimated in climate models.

Just when you think you’ve got the enemy figured out. . . .

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

By: Redactor


  1. JATR4 says:

    Guess yoiu missed this part:

    “Having more carbon taken up by plants would slow down climate change but there are many other processes which lay in between this work and the ultimate capacity of terrestrial ecosystems to remove carbon dioxide and store it for long enough to make a difference to atmospheric CO2 trends.”

    Many experts agree that the effect is interesting and may require a recalibration of models – but it doesn’t change the need for long-term emissions cuts to limit the impact of carbon dioxide.

    “This new research implies it will be slightly easier to fulfil the target of keeping global warming below two degrees – but with a big emphasis on ‘slightly’,” said Dr Chris Huntingford, a climate modeller at the UK’s Centre for Ecology and Hydrology.

    “Overall, the cuts in CO2 emissions over the next few decades will still have to be very large if we want to keep warming below two degrees.”

  2. I am noticing a sharp decline, a slide downhill so to speak, on the intelligence of people who hold “important positions” and are asked frequently to comment on their opinions Could that possibly be true?

  3. Brian Wright says:

    The weather modification we need to be concerned about most is stratospheric aerosol geoengineering and other intentional environmental assaults on humanity by the government(s) and their corporate allies, such as HAARP. These are warming factors with potentially catastrophic results.

  4. Rick says:

    Everything this president has done is political. Therefore i expect all his cabinet and everybody else to actively toe the line on all things important to this president such as global warming and initiate programs to further the agenda. Not surprising but probably laughable by the time Obama retires to the rocker when the real history of his disastrous presidency is written.

  5. Karen says:

    Ditto what Rick said & also the absurdity of this government would be the stuff of a “Dumb & Dumber” sequel. Instead of concern for our indebtedness everywhere, our Vets not getting the care they need, vast unemployment or under employment, a crumbling infrastructure, a porous border, etc. Our officials are concerned about climate change. It’s pitiful.

  6. david says:

    If climate change does exist its primary cause would be the hot air generated from all the liberal politicians spouting off about something they know nothing about

  7. David says:

    JATR confuses assertions with demonstrations, and that’s exactly the stock in trade of the global-scaremongering brigade.

  8. Drik says:

    Not a single computer model is able to go back in time and predict what is happening now, yet we are to believe that their future for cast is accurate. The climate model that NASA came out with, based on the effect of the solar “elevator” affecting sun spot/storm activities and the radiation impact on cloud generation was surprisingly accurate. It has been buried because it predicted things would either stay static or cool substantially. That model has been buried and the NASA administration changed.
    A peacetime army is a greater threat to America than all of its enemies have ever been.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

© 2018 Common Sense with Paul Jacob, All Rights Reserved. Back to top