Sandwiches en la Torre de la Vela

Asociacionismo, libertad y comida rápida, por Jahd

26 de Febrero 2004

El Pentágono esperando Waterworld

Buscando un poco he llegado a esto:

Now the Pentagon tells Bush: climate change will destroy us

· 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 defence 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.

Sinceramente, me niego a creer que alguien en el Pentágono escriba en serio estas cosas. Esto otro parece más creible, y lo que es más importante, más razonado:

Dr. Tim Patterson, professor of earth sciences (Paleoclimatology) at Carleton University, and climate historian Hubert H. Lamb demonstrate that during warm periods civilization flourished and weather was more moderate. In cold periods, there was more drought, famine, wars and disease.

Between 900 and 1300 A.D., the Earth warmed 1 to 2°C; , depending on latitude - approximately what climate models now predict for the 21st century. This warming resulted in one of the most favorable periods in history.
[...]
Considering the massive impact cold periods have had on civilization, we have to wonder if global warming concerns of the past two decades have been overblown.

Para leerlo entero, por supuesto. Aquí hay una traducción del mismo.

Actualización
El informe original (se supone): An Abrupt Climate Change Scenario and Its Implications for United States National Security. Aún no he tenido tiempo de leerlo a fondo.

La inmensa mayoría de enlaces con la noticia remiten al original de The Observer. Este es el primero que he encontrado de momento que va algo más allá:


A recent report on the possible future effects of global warming, issued by two researchers working for the U.S. Department of Defense, is being unfortunately misinterpreted as a prediction of imminent climatic disaster.
[...]
The Pentagon naturally believes it has to research any possible threat – whether it be an alien invasion, an accidental nuclear detonation, or catastrophic climate change
[...]
The authors also decline to endorse the energy suppression agenda of the Kyoto Protocol and similar measures which would make the world poorer without providing any discernible impact on the climate.

También está comentado aquí:

Ick, the Guardian appears to be severly misrepresenting a Pentagon climate change document.
[...]
I have serious doubt whether this document predicts anything. Most likely, its a contingency planning document that presupposes abrupt climate change in order to develop a military strategy for dealing with its possibility - regardless of how slight it may be.
[...]
It took me less than a minute to read for myself that this document is not a prediction - what the hell was the Guardian reading? Also notice the talk of consensus in there again. Shame, shame, science and consensus don't mix.