Everyone Is Misinterpreting Mattis’s Remarks On Climate Change

dailycaller.com ^ | Michael Bastasch

[Gargantua]

I'm kind of stunned by the anti-Mattis crap I saw here yesterday, just for stating factually, and wisely, that (paraphrasing) 'Climate change can pose National Security problems we have to prepare for...'

What the knee-jerkers need to understand is the vast gulf between "climate change" which happens all the time, and "man-made climate change" which is a man-made farce.

C'mon guys. We're better than this. Use your brains, then type. Reason:

The Warrior Monk doesn't suffer fools.

[Gargantua]

"...irregardless..."

You mean "regardless," or "without regard."

"Irregardless" would mean "without without regard," or "with regard." Irregardless is a redundancy, and consequently a malaprop. Further, and perhaps more to the point, it's not even a word.

Regardless.

[Lisbon1940]

Yes, but how do you feel about climate and the military? Seems like it stopped Napoleon.

[TigersEye]

I'm kind of stunned by the anti-Mattis crap I saw here yesterday, just for stating factually, and wisely, that (paraphrasing) 'Climate change can pose National Security problems we have to prepare for...'

That is not factual or wise it's stupid. The weather can change quickly the climate does not.

[Billthedrill]

Call me cynical, but if you want to get increased funding from people who do believe that climate change is going to be a factor, then this is what you'd say.

[Gargantua]

I think Mattis is very much the scholarly warrior we've been advised that he is. I think his genius extends to considering all battlefield conditions and planning to succeed whatever they may be.

Napoleon made a strategic error (several, actually), and a combination of haphazard strategy, a rain-sodden field, and Wellington's remarkable defensive preparations held the day.

Had Napoleon not faced the inability to quickly move scores of heavy artillery to the battlefield in those conditions, who knows...?

On that point, you could not be more right.

[Gargantua]

"That is not factual or wise it's stupid. The weather can change quickly the climate does not."

Actually, climactic conditions can vary greatly in relatively short periods, and last for quite some time.

I live in New England, and we've had two very mild winters in a row. There are currently droughts that have plagued various regions of the planet for years now.

Ever hear of "The Dust Bowl"?

I think Mattis and I are right on this one, but that's just my opinion.

[TigersEye]

Yes, the Dust Bowl is the general climate of the Oklahoma region. Has been for centuries. You’re confusing weather with climate.

[Gargantua]

NO, I was referring to "The Dust Bowl" of the '30's when it was impossible for years to grow any crops in our heartland due to the horrible pandemic drought. Six states were directly, either totally or nearly totally involved and ten or eleven had all their wheat production destroyed.

Hundreds or thousands died of "silicosis," a form of slow suffocation from the minute particulates which were incessantly borne by the hot dry winds. Mostly babies, children and the elderly perished.

Wrong again, Buckeroo. That was, and is still to this day, scientifically referred to as a "mini-climate-change." Meteorologically totally different from day-to-day or season-to-season weather patterns in both scope, effect, and duration (which necessitates the alternate nomenclature).

;^)

[TigersEye]

Yes, the Dust Bowl of the ‘30s. It was caused by bad farming practices that opened up the ground exposing it to the high dry winds stripping the land of billions of cubic yards of topsoil. The climate was no different before and it’s no different now.

[TigersEye]

..."mini-climate-change."

Was there a mini-hockey stick? LOL

News flash, the weather is not identical every year in any given region.