US Navy Admiral Locklear is wrong on climate

by Dr. Ed Berry, former consultant to Naval Weapons Center, only civilian participant in DOD’s Top-Secret Project Popeye

AdmLocklearUS Navy Admiral Samuel J. Locklear commands America’s defense of the Pacific Region, or about one-third of the planet.

According to the Boston Globe of March 9, 2013:

America’s top military officer in charge of monitoring hostile actions by North Korea, escalating tensions between China and Japan, and a spike in computer attacks traced to China provides an unexpected answer when asked, “What is the biggest long-term security threat in the Pacific Region?” His answer: Climate change.

Navy Admiral Samuel J. Locklear III, … said significant upheaval related to the warming planet “is probably the most likely thing that is going to happen . . . that will cripple the security environment, probably more likely than the other scenarios we all often talk about.’

We have interjected into our multilateral dialogue – even with China and India – the imperative to kind of get military capabilities aligned [for] when the effects of climate change start to impact these massive populations.

If it goes bad, you could have hundreds of thousands or millions of people displaced and then security will start to crumble pretty quickly.’’

Admiral Locklear seems to have forgotten about North Korea and China.

Does Admiral Locklear actually believe the political and military leaders of China, Russia, and India believe the climate change nonsense Obama is forcing on America? In reality, the leaders of China and Russia are doing a number on America, and on the Admiral.

Russia learned many years ago the disaster of promoting Lysenkoism in its biological field of science. Fortunately for Russia, it did not force a fictitious belief on its physicists. And today, Russia’s physicists and meteorologists have advised Putin to not fall for the climate change myth promoted by the United Nations and America’s politicians, insurance companies, big businesses and liberal university professors.

Similarly, China’s physicists and meteorologists understand that human carbon dioxide emissions are not the cause of climate change.

Chinese and Russian political and military leaders play along with America’s climate change mythology to encourage America to commit suicide by shutting down its energy production, economy and, thereby, its powerful military. Meanwhile, China and Russia are building their energy, production and military power with the goal of someday being more capable than the US military.

Admiral Locklear will derail his defense strategy if he continues to believe in the biggest scientific hoax ever promoted on the human race. Until the good Admiral can get his facts and science correct, he will derail America’s defense.

Admiral Locklear should, at the very least, read the words of the most qualified atmospheric scientists on the planet.

Anyone who accepts the global warming hypothesis that human carbon dioxide emissions cause significant climate change but who will not read and consider the statements by the best atmospheric scientists in the world (in the Climate Depot Special Report linked below), is a person whose judgement cannot be trusted.

(As we demonstrate in the post linked at the end of this article, Admiral Locklear is so deficient in his understanding of atmospheric science that he has not even asked the correct questions or referred to the correct data necessary to draw his conclusion.)

Noted physicist Hal Lewis wrote the following on October 6, 2010, in his resignation letter from the American Physics Society (APS):

It is of course, the global warming scam, with the (literally) trillions of dollars driving it, that has corrupted so many scientists, and has carried APS before it like a rogue wave. It is the greatest and most successful pseudo-scientific fraud I have seen in my long life as a physicist.

Anyone who has the faintest doubt that this is so should force himself to read the ClimateGate documents, which lay it bare. (Montford’s book organizes the facts very well.) I don’t believe that any real physicist, nay scientist, can read that stuff without revulsion. I would almost make that revulsion a definition of the word scientist.

In a US Senate hearing, Admiral Locklear brushed off a question by Senator Inhofe, the Senate’s expert on climate change (reported by This amounts to a blatant refusal by our top Admiral of the US Navy to read and consider the conclusions of 1000’s of the world’s top scientists that climate change is the biggest fraud ever perpetuated on the human race.

Admiral Locklear and all those who influence public policy should review, as a part of his job, Senator Inhofe’s 2010, 321-page, Climate Depot Special Report: More Than 1000 International Scientists Dissent Over Man-Made Global Warming Claims.

The Report notes on its first page, “The well over 1,000 dissenting scientists are almost 20 times the number of UN scientists (52) who authored the media-hyped IPCC 2007 Summary for Policymakers.

Many of these scientists are current or former UN IPCC scientists, who have now turned against the UN IPCC.

This easily readable report list the scientists and their statements on global warming scam. (I am listed on page 26.) It should dispel any layman’s concern that we must believe those who claim our carbon dioxide emissions are dangerous to the planet.

Here are just a few of the statements by scientists in this report:

“Any reasonable scientific analysis must conclude the basic theory wrong!!” — NASA Scientist Dr. Leonard Weinstein who worked 35 years at the NASA Langley Research Center and finished his career there as a Senior Research Scientist. Weinstein is presently a Senior Research Fellow at the National Institute of Aerospace.

“Please remain calm: The Earth will heal itself — Climate is beyond our power to control…Earth doesn’t care about governments or their legislation. You can’t find much actual global warming in present-day weather observations. Climate change is a matter of geologic time, something that the earth routinely does on its own without asking anyone’s permission or explaining itself.”Nobel Prize-Winning Stanford University Physicist Dr. Robert B. Laughlin, who won the Nobel Prize for physics in 1998, and was formerly a research scientist at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory.

“In essence, the jig is up. The whole thing is a fraud. And even the fraudsters that fudged data are admitting to temperature history that they used to say didn’t happen…Perhaps what has doomed the Climategate fraudsters the most was their brazenness in fudging the data” — Dr. Christopher J. Kobus, Associate Professor of Mechanical Engineering at Oakland University, specializes in alternative energy, thermal transport phenomena, two-phase flow and fluid and thermal energy systems and has published peer-reviewed papers.

The energy mankind generates is so small compared to that overall energy budget that it simply cannot affect the climate…The planet’s climate is doing its own thing, but we cannot pinpoint significant trends in changes to it because it dates back millions of years while the study of it began only recently. We are children of the Sun; we simply lack data to draw the proper conclusions.” — Russian Scientist Dr. Anatoly Levitin, the head of geomagnetic variations laboratory at the Institute of Terrestrial Magnetism, Ionosphere and Radiowave Propagation of the Russian Academy of Sciences who has 4 published numerous peer-reviewed studies about the interaction of solar radiation with the Earth’s magnetic field.

“Hundreds of billion dollars have been wasted with the attempt of imposing a
Anthropogenic Global Warming (AGW) theory that is not supported by physical world evidences…AGW has been forcefully imposed by means of a barrage of scare stories and indoctrination that begins in the elementary school textbooks.” — Brazilian Geologist Geraldo Luís Lino, who authored the 2009 book “The Global Warming Fraud: How a Natural Phenomenon Was Converted into a False World Emergency.”

“I am ashamed of what climate science has become today.” The science “community is relying on an inadequate model to blame CO2 and innocent citizens for global warming in order to generate funding and to gain attention. If this is what ‘science’ has become today, I, as a scientist, am ashamed.” — Research Chemist William C. Gilbert published a study in August 2010 in the journal Energy & Environment titled “The thermodynamic relationship between surface temperature and water vapor concentration in the troposphere” and he published a paper in August 2009 titled “Atmospheric Temperature Distribution in a Gravitational Field.” [Updated December 9, 2010]

The dysfunctional nature of the climate sciences is nothing short of a scandal.
Science is too important for our society to be misused in the way it has been done within the Climate Science Community.” The global warming establishment “has actively suppressed research results presented by researchers that do not comply with the dogma of the IPCC.” — Swedish Climatologist Dr. Hans Jelbring of the Paleogeophysics & Geodynamics Unit at Stockholm University. [Updated December 9, 2010. Corrects Jelbring’s quote.]

Those who call themselves ‘Green planet advocates’ should be arguing for a CO2- fertilized atmosphere, not a CO2-starved atmosphere…Diversity increases when the planet was warm AND had high CO2 atmospheric content…Al Gore’s personal behavior supports a green planet – his enormous energy use with his 4 homes and his bizjet, does indeed help make the planet greener. Kudos, Al for doing your part to save the planet.” — Renowned engineer and aviation/space pioneer Burt Rutan, who was named “100 most influential people in the world, 2004” by Time Magazine and Newsweek called him “the man responsible for more innovations in modern aviation than any living engineer.”

“There are clear cycles during which both temperature and salinity rise and fall. These cycles are related to solar activity…In my opinion and that of our institute, the problems connected to the current stage of warming are being exaggerated. What we are dealing with is not a global warming of the atmosphere or of the oceans.” — Biologist Pavel Makarevich of the Biological Institute of the Russian Academy of Sciences.

Background: Only 52 Scientists Participated in UN IPCC Summary

The notion of “hundreds” or “thousands” of UN scientists agreeing to a scientific statement does not hold up to scrutiny.  Recent research by Australian climate data analyst John McLean revealed that the IPCC’s peer review process for the Summary for Policymakers leaves much to be desired. (Note: The 52 scientists who participated in the 2007 IPCC Summary for Policymakers had to adhere to the wishes of the UN political leaders and delegates in a process described as more closely resembling a political party’s convention platform battle, not a scientific process.)

Proponents of man-made global warming like to note how the National Academy of
Sciences (NAS) and the American Meteorological Society (AMS) have issued statements endorsing the so-called “consensus” view that man is driving global warming. But both the NAS and AMS never allowed member scientists to directly vote on these climate statements. Essentially, only two dozen or so members on the governing boards of these institutions produced the “consensus” statements. This report gives a voice to the rank and-file scientists who were shut out of the process.

While the scientists contained in this report hold a diverse range of views, they generally rally around several key points:

  1. The Earth is currently well within natural climate variability.
  2. Almost all climate fear is generated by unproven computer model predictions.
  3. An abundance of peer-reviewed studies continue to debunk rising CO2 fears.
  4. Consensus” has been manufactured for political, not scientific purposes.

Let’s ask question again: “What is the biggest long-term security threat in the Pacific Region?” The real answer: America’s unfounded belief in Climate change.

Now read the science part: US Navy Admiral Locklear Fooled by Climate Fraud Science.

4 thoughts on “US Navy Admiral Locklear is wrong on climate”

  1. All companies are trying to do is get people scared so they buy their 'Environmentally friendly' products, like expensive solar panels and personal wind turbines. It's just like those companies who promote their '100% fresh, no preservative' products to those who are scared about suffering debilitating diseases by eating fast food. It's just absolute nonsense that people stick to because they're too lazy to research on the crap that is blaring out of the television at 7am.

  2. Bucky O'Donahue

    "US Navy Admiral Locklear falls for climate fraud"

    Why do you disparage the knowledge of the great men and women who serve the USA in our military?

    Nearly all our military leaders understand and accept AGW – Adm Locklear is just one. They are taking actions to protect America.
    Why do you hate America?

  3. @3 Dear Bucky, How can you get through life with your lack of logic? My criticism of Admiral Locklear's faulty thinking about climate change is not the same as criticizing him as a military leader or as a person.

    While Admiral Locklear may be excellent in his military leadership, he is making a serious mistake in accepting the liberal "belief" that our carbon dioxide emissions are changing our climate. This is a belief that is unsupported by science. We must make our leaders aware when they make serious mistakes and this is one example.

    It is not true that "nearly all our military leaders understand and accept AGW". Click the link to Stand Up America (in the right column of this page) to see the website of MG Paul Vallely who is wise enough to understand that AGW is a myth.

    Admiral Locklear has an unwarranted religious belief in AGW. He should be smart enough to simply get his facts straight and use the scientific method before he makes false claims about reality.

    As a military leader, the last thing Admiral Locklear should be concerned about is climate change. Even if AGW were true and it is not, climate change is too slow and unpredictable to be relevant in military strategy or tactics. Concern about AGW can cause the Admiral to lose a war. Isn't the buildup of the Chinese military just a little more dangerous to America than climate change?

Leave a Comment

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

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.