Free Energy, Abrupt Climate Change and Polar Reversals

THe Pentagon had a recent report made available to the mass media in
which the scenario of Abrupt Climate change was analysed. Some people
in here like Tom McDonald claim that no such thing can happen. I guess
he isn't aware of the ice core samples which prove that climate can
undergo radical departure from the normal temperatures in a very short time.

---------
Schwartz, Peter and Doug Randall. An Abrupt Climate Change Scenario and
Its Implications for United States Security. October 2003. (report
commissioned by the US Dept. of Defense - Available at:
http://www.ems.org/climate/pentagon_...ge.html#report).

From National Public Radio Living on Earth Segment Broadcast March 5th,
2004 on these issues a Dr. SCHRAG, Professor of Earth and Planetary
Sciences at Harvard University was interviewed. He noted the following
after Steve Curwood's question:

CURWOOD: Why now all this attention to the question of abrupt
climate change? The Greenland ice core samples that you told us about
have been around for a long time, demonstrating that it didn't take more
than a few decades to change a lot of temperature. And yet today, folks
like the Defense Department, folks in Hollywood, are suddenly paying
attention to the question of abrupt climate change. Why is that happening?

SCHRAG: I think there are powerful forces in our society that have
a lot of economic stake in our current energy technology, and are
resistant to change. And therefore have promoted the idea that this was
just a theory, that climate change was just an idea that scientists had
that they weren't sure about, and discouraged action on this front.

http://www.cseti.org/position/greer/goingtactical.htm

"Mad Scientist" wrote in message
t.cable.rogers.com...

THe Pentagon had a recent report made available to the mass media in
which the scenario of Abrupt Climate change was analysed.

What is "abrupt"? a day, a week, a year, a decade, a century, a millenium?
In any event it the study was not to determine IF an abrupt change ws
likely, or even possible, but what the defense department would need to do
in response to such a change. the DoD does this routinely for many
potentially adverse scenarios. Hey, these guys get PAID for fantasizing!
And that is all it is, expensive fantasy. Using such a report as a basis
for a scientific argument is like using a Kelly Freas painting as an
anatomical reference for an alien. Yeah, it is pretty and detailed, but it
is just fantasy.

:snipped
CURWOOD: Why now all this attention to the question of abrupt
climate change? The Greenland ice core samples that you told us about
have been around for a long time, demonstrating that it didn't take more
than a few decades to change a lot of temperature. And yet today, folks
like the Defense Department, folks in Hollywood, are suddenly paying
attention to the question of abrupt climate change. Why is that happening?


OOOOOHH!! people in HOLLYWOOD!! That's who I look to for answers and
insight concerning complex scientific questions.


SCHRAG: I think there are powerful forces in our society that have
a lot of economic stake in our current energy technology, and are
resistant to change. And therefore have promoted the idea that this was
just a theory, that climate change was just an idea that scientists had
that they weren't sure about, and discouraged action on this front.

What about the powerful forces in our society that have a lot of interest in
the capitalist system failing? What about the people that just have some
oddball agenda and glomp on to any narrow focus "scientific" opinion that
advances their cause?

Global warming? For sure!! Many people are under the impression that the
weather in 1957 was the way it "should be" and ingore the fact that the
earth undergoes constant changing weather patterns affected by the position
of the continents, proximity to the sun, solar activity, and hundreds of
other factors. Man could cease to exist tomorrow and the weather would
continue to get warmer (prehaps) and then get colder (perhaps).

In conclusion, if the weather changes abriuptly, so what. Oh, you can claim
a million people will die. What's the point? We are all going to die in
any circumstance. New York City flooded? They can build a retaining wall!

The popular "science" surrounding global warming is mostly crap based on
incomplete modeling and driven by politicians, not scientists. In the past
fifty years scientists have predicted all kinds of horrible ends based on
climate change. None have occured.

chuck petterson

I don't think the Pentagon is prone to fantasizing. Hollywood yes, Top
Military scientists, hardly.

spam this wrote:

"Mad Scientist" wrote in message
t.cable.rogers.com...

THe Pentagon had a recent report made available to the mass media in
which the scenario of Abrupt Climate change was analysed.


What is "abrupt"? a day, a week, a year, a decade, a century, a millenium?
In any event it the study was not to determine IF an abrupt change ws
likely, or even possible, but what the defense department would need to do
in response to such a change. the DoD does this routinely for many
potentially adverse scenarios. Hey, these guys get PAID for fantasizing!
And that is all it is, expensive fantasy. Using such a report as a basis
for a scientific argument is like using a Kelly Freas painting as an
anatomical reference for an alien. Yeah, it is pretty and detailed, but it
is just fantasy.


:snipped
CURWOOD: Why now all this attention to the question of abrupt
climate change? The Greenland ice core samples that you told us about
have been around for a long time, demonstrating that it didn't take more
than a few decades to change a lot of temperature. And yet today, folks
like the Defense Department, folks in Hollywood, are suddenly paying
attention to the question of abrupt climate change. Why is that happening?



OOOOOHH!! people in HOLLYWOOD!! That's who I look to for answers and
insight concerning complex scientific questions.


SCHRAG: I think there are powerful forces in our society that have
a lot of economic stake in our current energy technology, and are
resistant to change. And therefore have promoted the idea that this was
just a theory, that climate change was just an idea that scientists had
that they weren't sure about, and discouraged action on this front.


What about the powerful forces in our society that have a lot of interest in
the capitalist system failing? What about the people that just have some
oddball agenda and glomp on to any narrow focus "scientific" opinion that
advances their cause?

Global warming? For sure!! Many people are under the impression that the
weather in 1957 was the way it "should be" and ingore the fact that the
earth undergoes constant changing weather patterns affected by the position
of the continents, proximity to the sun, solar activity, and hundreds of
other factors. Man could cease to exist tomorrow and the weather would
continue to get warmer (prehaps) and then get colder (perhaps).

In conclusion, if the weather changes abriuptly, so what. Oh, you can claim
a million people will die. What's the point? We are all going to die in
any circumstance. New York City flooded? They can build a retaining wall!

The popular "science" surrounding global warming is mostly crap based on
incomplete modeling and driven by politicians, not scientists. In the past
fifty years scientists have predicted all kinds of horrible ends based on
climate change. None have occured.

chuck petterson

you missed the point. The report has nothing to do with whether orr not
global warming is a valid premise. The report is a set of scenarios based
on global warming being fait acompli and what potential ramifications might
be.

Aside from that, you are wrong about "the pentagon" not being prone to
fantasizing. The DoD pays big bucks to a LOT of people who spend their time
thinking WAY "out of the box." Yes, DoD has some serious work to do, but
that doesn't preclude exploring alternative lines of thought.

chuck petterson


"Mad Scientist" wrote in message
ogers.com...
I don't think the Pentagon is prone to fantasizing. Hollywood yes, Top
Military scientists, hardly.

spam this wrote:

"Mad Scientist" wrote in message
t.cable.rogers.com...

THe Pentagon had a recent report made available to the mass media in
which the scenario of Abrupt Climate change was analysed.


What is "abrupt"? a day, a week, a year, a decade, a century, a
millenium?
In any event it the study was not to determine IF an abrupt change ws
likely, or even possible, but what the defense department would need to
do
in response to such a change. the DoD does this routinely for many
potentially adverse scenarios. Hey, these guys get PAID for
fantasizing!
And that is all it is, expensive fantasy. Using such a report as a
basis
for a scientific argument is like using a Kelly Freas painting as an
anatomical reference for an alien. Yeah, it is pretty and detailed, but
it
is just fantasy.


:snipped
CURWOOD: Why now all this attention to the question of abrupt
climate change? The Greenland ice core samples that you told us about
have been around for a long time, demonstrating that it didn't take more
than a few decades to change a lot of temperature. And yet today, folks
like the Defense Department, folks in Hollywood, are suddenly paying
attention to the question of abrupt climate change. Why is that
happening?



OOOOOHH!! people in HOLLYWOOD!! That's who I look to for answers and
insight concerning complex scientific questions.


SCHRAG: I think there are powerful forces in our society that have
a lot of economic stake in our current energy technology, and are
resistant to change. And therefore have promoted the idea that this was
just a theory, that climate change was just an idea that scientists had
that they weren't sure about, and discouraged action on this front.


What about the powerful forces in our society that have a lot of
interest in
the capitalist system failing? What about the people that just have
some
oddball agenda and glomp on to any narrow focus "scientific" opinion
that
advances their cause?

Global warming? For sure!! Many people are under the impression that
the
weather in 1957 was the way it "should be" and ingore the fact that the
earth undergoes constant changing weather patterns affected by the
position
of the continents, proximity to the sun, solar activity, and hundreds
of
other factors. Man could cease to exist tomorrow and the weather would
continue to get warmer (prehaps) and then get colder (perhaps).

In conclusion, if the weather changes abriuptly, so what. Oh, you can
claim
a million people will die. What's the point? We are all going to die
in
any circumstance. New York City flooded? They can build a retaining
wall!

The popular "science" surrounding global warming is mostly crap based on
incomplete modeling and driven by politicians, not scientists. In the
past
fifty years scientists have predicted all kinds of horrible ends based
on
climate change. None have occured.

chuck petterson

"spam this" wrote in message
...
you missed the point. The report has nothing to do with whether orr
not
global warming is a valid premise. The report is a set of scenarios
based
on global warming being fait acompli and what potential ramifications
might
be.

Aside from that, you are wrong about "the pentagon" not being prone to
fantasizing. The DoD pays big bucks to a LOT of people who spend their
time
thinking WAY "out of the box." Yes, DoD has some serious work to do,
but
that doesn't preclude exploring alternative lines of thought.

Exempli Gratia: (so called) remote viewing.

More "Gloom and Doom"...
It never ends.
super volcanoes, giant tsunamis, asteroid impacts
and on and on it goes.
People watch too much TV
Eric

"Mad Scientist" wrote in message
t.cable.rogers.com...

THe Pentagon had a recent report made available to the mass media in
which the scenario of Abrupt Climate change was analysed. Some people
in here like Tom McDonald claim that no such thing can happen. I guess
he isn't aware of the ice core samples which prove that climate can
undergo radical departure from the normal temperatures in a very short
time.

Well, nuclear winter can happen from nuclear blast, volcanoes, or something
big hitting earth....

Also, it is estimated that earth can lose magnetic field in couple hundred
years....


---------
Schwartz, Peter and Doug Randall. An Abrupt Climate Change Scenario and
Its Implications for United States Security. October 2003. (report
commissioned by the US Dept. of Defense - Available at:
http://www.ems.org/climate/pentagon_...ge.html#report).

From National Public Radio Living on Earth Segment Broadcast March 5th,
2004 on these issues a Dr. SCHRAG, Professor of Earth and Planetary
Sciences at Harvard University was interviewed. He noted the following
after Steve Curwood's question:

CURWOOD: Why now all this attention to the question of abrupt
climate change? The Greenland ice core samples that you told us about

Probably movie Day After Tomorrow? or some nova program about earth losing
magnetic field?

SCHRAG: I think there are powerful forces in our society that have
a lot of economic stake in our current energy technology, and are
resistant to change. And therefore have promoted the idea that this was
just a theory, that climate change was just an idea that scientists had
that they weren't sure about, and discouraged action on this front.

Yes, evil oil/war merchant/drug/tabacco etc.....

Good thing about it is.... either god will punish them OR even worse, they
will die and nothing exist after death for them.