Warming Turns

Turns Agriculture
Climate change badtemperature spikes massively harm crop yields
discussions of how a rise in average temperate affects crop yields ignore
effects of peak temperature
The Economist, 2011, One Degree Over, March 17, http://www.economist.com/node/18386161/, last accessed
7.2.12
FOR a scientist, there are few happier accidents than finding a trove of data that were gathered for other purposes, but which apply
to your pet problem. That happened to David Lobell, a researcher at Stanford University, when he
started talking to Marianne Bnziger of the International Maize and Wheat Improvement Centre, in Mexico, about
how climate change would affect crops in Africa.
Dr Bnziger and her colleagues had been running an ambitious set of field trials designed to look at what sorts of maize (corn, to
Americans) grow best in various parts of southern and eastern Africa, paying special attention to drought resistance. They were
struggling, though, to find the money to pull the results from 123 separate research stations together into one big, tractable
database. Dr Lobell realised that if he helped them he could also use the result to correlate yields
with meteorological conditions other than drought, and thus reveal any harm done by
hotter-than-usual weather. His conclusions, published this week in Nature Climate Change, confirm for
the tropics the findings for temperate climes of a recent American study. This is that
peak, rather than average, temperatures are what matter most to maize.
Days above 30C are particularly damaging. In otherwise normal conditions, every day the
temperature is over this threshold diminishes yields by at least 1%. Moreover, days where
the temperature exceeds 32C do twice the harm of those at 31C. And during a drought,
things are worse still. Then, yields take a hit of 1.7% per day over 30C.
This matters because increasing the average temperature only a bit can multiply the number
of the hottest days a lot. The research predicts that a 1C rise in average temperature will
reduce yields across two-thirds of the maize-growing region of Africa, even in the
absence of drought. Add drought and that effect spreads over the entire area.
Turns Bio-D
Climate change badeven if it saves some species, more will go extinction
our evidence is comparative
AP, 2012 , Seth Borenstein, St. Louis Today, Global Warming Benefits Once-Rare Butterfly, May 25,
http://www.stltoday.com/news/national/global-warming-benefits-once-rare-butterfly/article_8181ac9b-cd71-5894-a782-
1ce6e05cad9d.html, last accessed 7.2.12
The climate is threatening the existence of many species, such as the giant polar bear. But in the
case of the small drab British butterfly, it took a species in trouble and made it thrive.
It's all about food. Over about 25 years, the butterfly went from in trouble to pushing north in Britain where it found a veritable
banquet. Now the butterfly lives in twice as large an area as it once did and is not near threatened, according to a study in Friday's
issue of the journal Science. Decades ago, the brown Argus "was sort of a special butterfly that you would have to go to a special
place to see, and now it's a butterfly you can see in regular farmland or all over the place," said study co-author Richard Fox, an
ecologist at Butterfly Conservation, a science and advocacy group in the United Kingdom. Global warming helping
the brown Argus is unusual compared with other species, and that's why scientists are studying it
more, said study co-author Jane Hill, a professor of ecology at the University of York. Biologists expect climate
change to create winners and losers in species. Stanford University biologist Terry
Root, who wasn't part of this study, estimated that for every winner like the brown Argus there are
three loser species, like the cuckoo bird in Europe. Hill agreed that it's probably a 3-1 ratio of climate
change losers to winners. As the world warms, the key interactions between species
break down because the predator and prey may not change habitats at the same time,
meaning some species will move north to cooler climes and won't find enough to eat,
Root said. "There are just so many species that are going to go extinct," Root said.

Turns Economy
Warming turns econ---disasters, infrastructure, hidden costs, inequalities.
Center for Integrative Economic Research, Oct. 2007, The US Economic Impacts of
Climate Change and the Costs of Inaction, by the Univ. of Maryland,
http://www.cier.umd.edu/documents/US%20Economic%20Impacts%20of%20Climate%20Chang
e%20and%20the%20Costs%20of%20Inaction.pdf, DOA 7/3/13
Lesson 1: economic impacts of climate change will occur throughout the country. The effects of climate change will
be felt by the entire nation: all sectors of the economy - most notably agriculture, energy, and
transportation - will be affected; essential infrastructures that afford us reliable services and high standards of living
(such as water supply and water treatment) will be impacted; and ecosystems, on which quality of life
relies (such as forests, rivers, and lakes), will suffer . In theWest and Northwest,climate change is expected to
alter precipitation patterns and snow pack, thereby increasing the risk of forest fires . Forest fires cost billions of
dollars to suppress, and can result in significant loss of property .The Oakland, California fire of 1991 and
the fires in San Diego and San Bernardino Counties in 2003 each cost over $2 billion . Every year for the past four years, over 7
million acres of forests in the National Forest System have burned with annual suppression costs of $1 .3 billion or more . The
Great Plains and the Midwest will suffer particularly from increased frequency and severity of flooding and
drought events, causing billions of dollars in damages to crops and property . For example, the North Dakota Red
River floods in 3 1 Executive Summary 1997 caused $1 billion in agricultural production losses, and the Midwest floods of 1993
inflicted $6-8 billion in damages to farmers alone . The Northeast and Mid-Atlantic region will see increased vulnerability to sea
level rise and storms . Depending on the category of the event, evacuation costs for the Northeast region may range, for a
single event, between $2 and $6 .5 billion . Since 1980, there have been 70 natural weather-caused disasters, with damages to
coastal infrastructure exceeding $1 billion per event .Taken together, their combined impact surpassed $560
billion in damages . Decreased precipitation levels in the South and Southwest will strain water resources for agriculture,
industry and households . For the agriculturally productive Central Valley in California alone, the estimated economy-wide loss
during the driest years is predicted to be around $6 billion per year . Net agricultural income for the San Antonio Texas Edwards
Aquifer region is predicted to decline by 16-29% by 2030 and by 30-45% by 2090 because of competing uses for an increasingly
scarce resource water . The true economic impact of climate change is fraught with hidden costs
. Besides the replacement value of infrastructure, for example, there are real costs of re-routing
traffic, workdays and productivity lost, provision of temporary shelter and supplies, potential
relocation and re- training costs, and others . Likewise, the increased levels of uncertainty and
risk, brought about by climate change, impose new costs on the insurance, banking, and
investment industries, as well as complicate the planning processes for the agricultural and
manufacturing sectors and for public works projects . Since the early 1990s, and especially during the 21st
century, significant progress has been made in understanding the impacts of climate change at national, regional, and local scales
.These studies, many of which are discussed in the pages that follow, highlight physical processes that influence transportation,
energy and water supply systems, agriculture and forestry, fisheries, tourism, and other important economic sectors .There is,
however, a lack of research that quantifies and compares these impacts, and a deficiency in using what is known about climate
impacts to guide adaptation actions from the national level down to the local level . Thus, the full economic costs will likely be much
higher than what is reported currently . Lesson 2. economic impacts will be unevenly distributed across regions and within the
economy and society. Not all regions or sectors of the country will be equally affected by climate impacts because of differences
in climatic, economic and social conditions whose interplay influences coping capacities . For example, in the Northeast, the maple
sugar industry a $31 million industry - is expected to suffer losses of between 15 and 40% ($5-12 million) in annual revenue due to
decreased sap flow .The region can expect a decrease of 10- 20% in skiing days, resulting in a loss of $405-810 million per year .The
dairy industry is also highly sensitive to temperature changes, since the dairy cows productivity starts decreasing above 77F (25C) .
In California, an annual loss of $287-902 million is expected for this $4 .1 billion industry . Losses are expected to the $3 .2 billion
California wine industry as well, since grape quality diminishes with higher temperatures . In each case, these may be considered
small niche sectors in their respective economies accounting for less than one-tenth of gross state product yet they are an
essential element of local employment, history, culture and landscape .
Turns Food Prices
Climate change increase food prices
Koch, 2012 (By Wendy Koch, USA TODAY Climate change to worsen hunger as U.N.'s Rio+20 begins Jun 20, 2012,
http://content.usatoday.com/communities/greenhouse/post/2012/06/climate-change-exected-to-worsen-hunger-as-rio20-
begins/1#.T_RsbfXh-So accessed 7.4)
"Undernutrition is a determinant of poor health and it is women and children who suffer the most," Julio Frenk, dean of Harvard
University's School of Public Health, said in announcing the findings. "Maternal undernutrition can continue in children, extending
the cycle for at least three generations." The report says climate change will also affect food prices. Citing World Bank
data, it says those prices jumped 8% in the first quarter of 2012, partly due to extreme cold in
Europe that affected wheat crops and excessive heat in South America that lower production
of sugar, maize and soybeans. Another report, published today in the journal Energy and Environmental Science,
suggests several solutions to climate change and food shortages: farm efficiency, food waste recycling and lower meat consumption.
These changes could reduce the amount of land needed for farming, despite population growth, and leave sufficient land to produce
bio-energy, according to the study from the University of Exeter in the United Kingdom.
Turns Fisheries/Marine Ecosystems
Warming turns fisheries/marine ecosystems
Axelrod, Environmental politician, 2011 (Mark project muse Global Environmental politics
August 2011 6/26/12) JMV
Recent projections suggest that climate change will significantly reduce marine biodiversity,
with particularly strong impacts on high-latitude species and those living in semi-enclosed
seas where migration options are limited.
1
Although research is limited by system complexity
and indirect estimation, studies have already documented important marine ecosystem
changes resulting from longterm temperature shifts. These atmospheric changes lead to
modified phytoplankton photosynthesis3 and shifting habitats for fish and other oceanic spe-
cies.
4
The resulting new ecological patterns also affect social systems dependent on fishing-
related livelihoods.5 As a result, we might expect governments to turn their attention towards
climate change adaptation in the fisheries sector. Regional fisheries management organizations (RFMOs), meeting
annually to set fishing limits and other management rules, present an ideal venue in which to address climate change impacts on marine fisheries.
Indeed, some RFMOssuch as the International Whaling Commission (IWC)have addressed climate change repeatedly. Nonetheless, in
2007, the same year that the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) reiterated
climate threats and uncertainties for marine biodiversity6 and capture fisheries,7 only one out
of 17 UN-recognized RFMOs took explicit action on climate change. In that year, despite
growing awareness of vulnerability throughout the worlds oceans, the Commission for
Conservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources (CCAMLR) was the only RFMO to place
climate change prominently on its annual agenda. CCAMLR parties required the organizations Scientific Committee to
take action, and ensured that climate change would appear on all future CCAMLR annual agendas.
8
Although CCAMLR was the only RFMO to directly
address climate change in 2007, eight of the 17 RFMOs have addressed climate change in at least one annual meeting since 1992. This article seeks to
explain when and why RFMOs move beyond their classic management approachesassignment of property rights, catch limits, and gear restrictionsto
include climate change in their research and management plans. Variation in RFMO approaches to climate change provides an opportunity to understand
member state and secretariat behavior surrounding linkage politics.
Turns Hegemony
Warming turns Heg multiple reasons.
Jill Fitzsimmons, May 30 2012, researcher on Media Matters' energy and environment team.
She holds a B.S. in Political Science from Santa Clara University, cites 15 former military
generals; 15 Military Leaders Who Say Climate Change Is A National Security Threat;
http://mediamatters.org/blog/2012/05/30/15-military-leaders-who-say-climate-change-is-
a/184705, DOA 7/3/13
Republicans in Congress are attempting to prevent the military from purchasing alternative fuels, which Senator Inhofe (R-OK) believes are merely "perpetrating President
Obama's global warming fantasies and his war on affordable energy." And conservative media are backing the attacks on climate change and clean energy programs, suggesting
that these investments come at the expense of national security. But experts across the political spectrum agree that climate change poses a serious
threat to our national security, and that transitioning to alternative energy will enhance military effectiveness. Here are 15
current and former national security officials in their own words on the threat of climate change: Thomas Fingar, former chairman of President Bush's National Intelligence
Council: "We judge global climate change will have wide-ranging implications for US national security interests over the next 20 years ... We judge that the most significant
impact for the United States will be indirect and result from climate-driven effects on many other countries and their potential to seriously affect US national security
interests." Brig. General Steven Anderson, USA (Ret.), former Chief of Logistics under General Petraeus and a self-described "conservative Republican": "Our oil addiction, I
believe, is our greatest threat to our national security. Not just foreign oil but oil in general. Because I believe that in CO2 emissions and climate
change and the instability that that all drives, I think that that increases the likelihood there will be
conflicts in which American soldiers are going to have to fight and die somewhere." Leon Panetta, Secretary of Defense:
"[T]he area of climate change has a dramatic impact on national security: rising sea levels, to severe
droughts, to the melting of the polar caps, to more frequent and devastating natural disasters all raise demand for
humanitarian assistance and disaster relief." Robert Gates, former Secretary of Defense: "Over the next 20 years and more, certain pressures-population,
energy, climate, economic, environmental-could combine with rapid cultural, social, and technological change to produce new sources of deprivation, rage, and instability."
General Gordon Sullivan, USA (Ret.), former Army chief of staff: "Climate change is a national security issue. We found that climate instability will lead to instability in geopolitics
and impact American military operations around the world." Vice Admiral Dennis McGinn, USN (Ret.): "If the destabilizing effects of climate change go unchecked, we
can expect more frequent, widespread, and intense failed state scenarios creating large scale humanitarian disasters and higher
potential for conflict and terrorism ... The Department of Defense and national intelligence communities recognize this clear link between climate change, national
security, and instability and have begun strategic plans and programs to both mitigate and adapt to the most likely and serious effects in key areas around the globe." General
Anthony Zinni, USMC (Ret.), former Commander-in-Chief of U.S. Central Command and special envoy to Israel and Palestine under President George W. Bush: "It's not hard to
make the connection between climate change and instability, or climate change and terrorism." Admiral Joseph Lopez, USN (Ret.): "Climate change will provide the conditions
that will extend the war on terror." General Chuck Wald, USAF (Ret.), former Deputy Commander of U.S. European Command under President George W. Bush: "People can say
what they want to about whether they think climate change is manmade or not, but there's a problem there and the military is going to be a part of the solution. It's a national
security issue because it affects the stability of certain places in the world." Brig. General Bob Barnes, USA (Ret.): "While most people associate global warming with droughts,
rising sea levels, declining food production, species extinction and habitat destruction, fewer connect these impacts to increasing instability around the globe and the resulting
threats to our national security. But the connection - and the threat it poses - is real and growing." Vice Admiral Richard Truly, USN (Ret.), former NASA administrator: "The
stresses that climate change will put on our national security will be different than any we've dealt with in the past." General Paul Kern, USA (Ret.), Commander of the United
States Army Materiel Command under President George W. Bush: "Military planning should view climate change as a threat
to the balance of energy access, water supplies, and a healthy environment, and it should
require a response.' Lt. General Lawrence Farrell, USAF (Ret.): "The planning we do that goes into organizing, training, and equipping our military considers all
the risks that we may face. And one of the risks we see right now is climate change." Admiral John Nathman, USN (Ret.), former Commander of the U.S. Fleet Forces Command
under President George W. Bush: "There are serious risks to doing nothing about climate change. We can pay now or we're going to pay a whole lot later. The U.S. has a unique
opportunity to become energy independent, protect our national security and boost our economy while reducing our carbon footprint. We've been a model of success for the
rest of the world in the past and now we must lead the way on climate change." Vice Admiral Lee Gunn, USN (Ret.): "The national security community is rightly worried about
climate change because of the magnitude of its expected impacts around the globe, even in our own country ... Climate change poses a clear and present danger to the United
States of America. But if we respond appropriately, I believe we will enhance our security, not simply by averting the worst climate change impacts, but by spurring a new energy
revolution." The Pentagon recognizes that our dependence on oil is problematic not only because of the threat of climate change, but also because of volatile oil prices and
supply disruptions that can threaten the military's energy supply. It's Operational Energy Strategy states: The volatility of oil prices will continue to be a budgetary challenge for
the Department, and the realities of global oil markets mean a disruption of oil supplies is plausible and increasingly likely in the coming decades. The Services have already
taken steps to certify aircraft, ships, tactical vehicles, and support equipment to use alternative liquid fuels, a prudent insurance policy against future oil supply disruptions and
high prices. The Army also notes that transporting fuel can be deadly in a warzone.
Turns Natural Disasters
Warming turns natural disasters
Borenstein, Science writer at the Associated Press, 2012, (Seth, Chicago Sun Times Scientists
warn of climate-change onslaught April 30, http://www.suntimes.com/news/world/11585476-
418/scientists-warn-of-climate-change-onslaught.html)
<<Some weather extremes arent deadly, however. Sometimes, they are just strange. Report co-author David Easterling of
the National Climatic Data Center says this months U.S. heat wave, while not deadly, fits the
pattern of worsening extremes. The U.S. has set nearly 6,800 high temperature records in March. Last year, the
United States set a record for billion-dollar weather disasters, though many were tornadoes.
When you start putting all these events together, the insurance claims, its just amazing,
Easterling said. Its pretty hard to deny the fact that theres got to be some climate signal.
Northeastern University engineering and environment professor Auroop Ganguly, who didnt take part in writing the IPCC report,
praised it and said the extreme weather it highlights is one of the major and important types of
what we would call global weirding. Its a phrase that some experts have been starting to use
more to describe climate extremes. Field doesnt consider the term inaccurate, but he doesnt use it. It feels to
me like it might give the impression we are talking about amusing little stuff when we are, in
fact, talking about events and trends with the potential to have serious impacts on large
numbers of people. AP 0, the scientists wrote in the journal Ecosphere, a publication of the
Ecological Society of America. Using satellite-based fire records and 16 different climate
change models, the international team of researchers found that while wildfires will increase
in many temperate zones due to rising temperatures, fire risk may actually decrease around
the Equator, especially in tropical rainforests, because of increased rainfall. "In the long run,
we found what most fear - increasing fire activity across large areas of the planet," lead
author Max Moritz of the University of California-Berkeley.>> "But the speed and extent to
which some of these changes may happen is surprising. These abrupt changes in fire patterns
not only affects people's livelihoods, but also they add stress to native plants and animals that
are already struggling to adapt to habitat loss," Moritz said in a statement. Co-author Katharine Hayhoe of Texas
Tech University said this study gives a unique global perspective on recent fire patterns and their relationship to climate. Climate
scientists, including those affiliated with the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on
Climate Change, have projected that more frequent wildfires would be likely in a warming
world. Other effects of global warming include more severe storms, floods and droughts,
these scientists have said.
Turns Navy Power
Warming turns naval power
NBC March 2011, Navy's got new challenges with warming, experts say cites National
Research Council and Adm. Frank Bowman,
http://www.nbcnews.com/id/41990999/ns/us_news-environment/t/navys-got-new-challenges-
warming-experts-say/#.UdTrxBYTNdd, DOA 7/3/13
The U.S. Navy should plan for climate change impacts from costly base repairs, to
mobilizing for humanitarian aid and geopolitical conflicts in the Arctic the National Research Council
said in a report Thursday. "Even the most moderate predicted trends in climate change will present
new national security challenges," retired Adm. Frank Bowman, co-chair of the committee that wrote the report at the
Navy's request, said in a statement. "Naval forces need to monitor more closely and start preparing now
for projected challenges climate change will present in the future," he added. As rising temperatures
continue to melt sea ice, Arctic sea lanes could be regularly open across the Arctic by 2030, the report noted. The
region is already seeing ships testing the waters, as well as nations lining up to seek energy and mineral deposits. Russia has been
among the most aggressive in seeking energy riches, while Canada has beefed up its patrols. "The geopolitical situation in
the Arctic region has become complex and nuanced, despite the area being essentially ignored since the end of the
Cold War," the experts wrote. In order to protect U.S. interests, they added, "the Navy should begin Arctic training and the Marine
Corps should also reestablish a cold-weather training program. Rising sea levels and more extreme storm surges
tied to warming could also become costly for the Navy. A rise of three feet, the experts said, would
place at risk 56 Navy installations worth $100 billion. The Navy should expect a rise by 2100 anywhere
between a foot and six feet, they added.

Turns Nuclear War
Turns nuclear war
Dyer 9 Gwynne, MA in Military History and PhD in Middle Eastern History former @ Senior
Lecturer in War Studies at the Royal Military Academy Sandhurst, Climate Wars, CMR
THIS BOOK IS AN ATTEMPT, peering through a glass darkly, to understand the politics and the strategies of
the potentially apocalyptic crisis that looks set to occupy most of the twentyfirst century. There are now many
books available that deal with the science of climate change and some that suggest possible approaches to
getting the problem under control, but there are few that venture very far into the grim detail of how real
countries experiencing very different and, in some cases, overwhelming pressures as global warming
proceeds, are likely to respond to the changes. Yet we all know that it's mostly politics, national and
international, that will decide the outcomes. Two things in particular persuaded me that it was time to write
this book. One was the realization that the first and most important impact of climate change on
human civilization will be an acute and permanent crisis of food supply. Eating regularly is a
non-negotiable activity, and countries that cannot feed their people are unlikely to be
"reasonable" about it. Not all of them will be in what we used to call the "Third World" -the developing
countries of Asia, Africa and Latin America. The other thing that finally got the donkey's attention was a
dawning awareness that, in a number of the great powers, climate change scenarios are already
playing a large and increasing role in the military planning process. Rationally, you would
expect this to be the case, because each country pays its professional military establishment to identify and
counter "threats" to its security, but the implications of their scenarios are still alarming. There is a
probability of wars, including even nuclear wars , if temperatures rise two to three degrees
Celsius. Once that happens, all hope of international cooperation to curb emissions and stop the warming
goes out the window.
Turns Resource Wars
Turns resource conflicts droughts, food, and water scarcity
Holtermann et al, Doctoral researcher at PRIO, Winter 2011 (Helge, International Security
Vol. 36, No. 3 pg 79-106 Climate Wars? Assessing the Claim That Drought Breeds Conflct) CKP
Climate change is hot. Twice in recent years, the Nobel Peace Prize has been awarded to environmental activists: in 2004 to Wangari
Maathai and in 2007 to the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and former U.S. Vice President Al
Gore. In April 2007, the UN Security Council held its first ever debate on climate security. The chair of this debate, then British
Foreign Secretary Margaret Becket, left no doubt as to the connection between climate and confict: What makes wars
start? Fights over water. Changing patterns of rainfall. Fights over food production, land use.1
In the same year, a report by eleven retired U.S. generals and admirals stated that environmental security is no longer
soft politics, concluding that climate change is a threat multiplier for instability and confict
that will have repercussions for all.2 And in a speech to the UN on September 22, 2009, U.S. President and Nobel
laureate Barack Obama asserted that the threat from climate changes is serious, it is urgent, and it is
growing, as more frequent droughts and crop failures breed hunger and confict.3 Surely, such
statements must be based on solid scientific evidencemuch in the same manner as the natural sciences inform the debate on
likely physical changes? Not so. As a matter of fact, the policy debate on the security implications of climate
change has run far ahead of the scientific evidence base. This study represents one scholarly attempt to catch
up with the rhetoric. At the heart of the climate security discourse lies the issue of water scarcity. A key characteristic of
the worlds poorest and most vulnerable societies is their dependence on rain-fed agriculture
for income and food supply. Global warming is likely to affect precipitation patterns and
increase the unpredictability of extreme weather events, thereby probably having a negative
impact on health and food security in many parts of the world.4 Some argue that these developments might also have
implications for peace and security in a stricter sense. The environmental security literature offers several
case-based accounts of armed conflict within the context of competition over scarce
resources.5 Yet, it remains unclear whether these cases are exceptions or whether they epitomize a more systematic pattern of
resource scarcity and conflict, in general, and drought and violent conflict, in particular.6
Turns Struc. Violence
Turns struc. Violence- disproportionately impacts marginalized groups.
Weiss & Madrid, Weiss is a Senior Fellow and Director of Climate Strategy at the Center For American and Jorge Madrid is
a Research Associate at CAP, 2012 [By Daniel J. Weiss and Jorge Madrid, Daniel J. Weiss is a Senior Fellow and Director of Climate
Strategy at the Center For American and Jorge Madrid is a Research Associate at CAP. More Action on Climate Change: CAPs
Comments To the EPA on Its Proposed Carbon Pollution Standard. ThinkProgress Climate Progress <
http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2012/06/26/506541/more-action-on-climate-change-caps-comments-to-the-epa-on-its-proposed-
carbon-pollution-standard/?mobile=nc > June 26, 2012 accessed 06272012.] NWW
The United States will also experience an increase in regional ozone pollution due to higher
temperatures and poor air circulation. These health concerned are shared by more than 120 health organizations
including the American Academy of Pediatrics, American Lung Association, American Medical Association, American Nurses
Association, American Public Health Association, American Thoracic Society, and others who favor reductions in carbon pollution to
protect public health. These organizations identified a number of serious health harms from climate change: Climate change
is a serious public health issue. As temperatures rise, more Americans will be exposed to
conditions that can result in illness and death due to respiratory illness, heat- and weather-
related stress and disease carried by insects. These health issues are likely to have the
greatest impact on our most vulnerable communities, including children, older adults, those
with serious health conditions and the most economically disadvantaged.[15]
Turns Terrorism
Warming turns terror
Jill Fitzsimmons, May 30 2012, researcher on Media Matters' energy and environment team.
She holds a B.S. in Political Science from Santa Clara University, cites 15 former military
generals; 15 Military Leaders Who Say Climate Change Is A National Security Threat;
http://mediamatters.org/blog/2012/05/30/15-military-leaders-who-say-climate-change-is-
a/184705, DOA 7/3/13
Vice Admiral Dennis McGinn, USN (Ret.): "If the destabilizing effects of climate change go unchecked, we
can expect more frequent, widespread, and intense failed state scenarios creating large scale
humanitarian disasters and higher potential for conflict and terrorism ... The Department of
Defense and national intelligence communities recognize this clear link between climate change, national
security, and instability and have begun strategic plans and programs to both mitigate and adapt to the most likely and
serious effects in key areas around the globe."
Turns Relations/Instability
Turns instability and relationsstudies prove climate cycles drive war and
conflicts, empirically proven
Schiermeier, editor and writer for Nature specializing in policy and climate studies, degree in geography, statistics and
economics from University of Munich, 2011, Quirin, Nature Magazine, Climate cycles drive civil war, August 24,
http://www.nature.com/news/2011/110824/full/news.2011.501.html, last accessed 7.3.12
Natural climate cycles seem to have a striking influence on war and peace around the equator.
Tropical countries face double the risk of armed conflict and civil war breaking out during
warm, dry El Nio years than during the cooler La Nia phase of the El Nio/Southern Oscillation (ENSO), according to an
analysis published today inNature1. The study throws light on the hotly contested issue of whether
climate change has any notable effect on violence and societal stability, particularly in poor
countries. The authors of several popular books have previously proposed a link, but there are disagreements within the
scientific literature over whether a robust climate signal can be detected in conflict statistics. Previous studies have focused on the
question of how anthropogenic climate change might increase conflict risk. A 2009 study2 by economist Marshall Burke at the
University of California, Berkeley, and his co-workers found that the probability of armed conflict in sub-Saharan Africa was about
50% higher than normal in some unusually warm years since 1981. But critics point to statistical problems for instance when
linking possibly random local temperature and rainfall variations with outbreaks of civil war that may have resulted in a false
appearance of causality. To overcome this problem, Solomon Hsiang, an economist currently at Princeton
University in New Jersey, and his colleagues opted to look at how historical changes in the global, rather
than local, climate affect conflict risk1. Clear signal The team designed a 'quasi-experiment' for which they
divided the world into regions strongly affected by the ENSO the tropical parts of South America, Africa
and the AsiaPacific region, including parts of Australia and regions only weakly affected by it. They then
searched for a link between climate and armed conflicts that arose in the first group between
1950 and 2004. A very clear signal appeared in the data. The team found that the risk of annual civil
conflict doubles, from 3% to 6%, in countries of the ENSO-affected, or 'teleconnected', group during El
Nio years relative to La Nia years. In many cases, conflicts that might have broken out anyway may
have occurred earlier owing to the effects of El Nio, Hsiang suggests. Civil conflicts have been by far the most common
form of organized political violence in recent decades, Hsiang says. Globally, one-fifth of the 240 or so civil conflicts since 1950 could
be linked to the 47-year climate cycle originating in the southern Pacific, the study concludes. The results were unaffected by any
modification to the statistical set-up of the analysis such as excluding particularly crisis-prone African countries which the team
performed to confirm the robustness of their findings. "A doubling of risk is a very strong effect," says Halvard
Buhaug, a conflict researcher with the Peace Research Institute Oslo, who was not involved in the study. Buhaug, who has
previously criticized3 claims such as Burke's, says he feels "surprised and a bit puzzled" by the results. He grants that the study is
"very competently executed" but adds that the issue is nonetheless far from being settled. "I don't dismiss that a correlation exists,
but it is a correlation we so far don't understand," he says. "I remain sceptical about any potential causal connection." A more
detailed analysis of the 'narratives' of historical conflicts that have occurred during El Nio years is needed to establish whether any
factors that may have caused these conflicts such as harvest failures that led to food shortages can be traced to El Nio events,
he says. Greenhouse effects The authors of the study are aware of its limitation and of the difficulties involved in establishing a
causal link between climate and conflict. But, says Hsiang, case studies are ongoing at Columbia University in New York and
elsewhere on how El Nio events might link to local outbreaks of violence. "Different hypotheses have
been proposed as to how one phenomenon causes the other, and we aren't sure yet what the correct narrative is," he says. "It
could be that agricultural income in El Nio years drops to levels that can trigger violence.
Furthermore, psychologists think that aggressive behaviour gets generally more widespread during
exceptionally warm conditions."

Ext Climate Change Impact
Warming is real, anthropogenic, and causes extinction.
Deibel 7 (Terry L. Deibel, professor of IR at National War College, 2007, Foreign Affairs
Strategy, Conclusion: American Foreign
Finally, there is one major existential threat to American security (as well as prosperity) of a nonviolent nature, which,
though far in the future, demands urgent action. It is the threat of global warming to the stability of the climate upon which all
earthly life depends. Scientists worldwide have been observing the gathering of this threat for three decades
now, and what was once a mere possibility has passed through probability to near certainty. Indeed not one of more than 900
articles on climate change published in refereed scientific journals from 1993 to 2003 doubted that
anthropogenic warming is occurring. In legitimate scientific circles, writes Elizabeth Kolbert, it is virtually
impossible to find evidence of disagreement over the fundamentals of global warming. Evidence
from a vast international scientific monitoring effort accumulates almost weekly, as this sample of
newspaper reports shows: an international panel predicts brutal droughts, floods and violent storms
across the planet over the next century; climate change could literally alter ocean currents, wipe away
huge portions of Alpine Snowcaps and aid the spread of cholera and malaria; glaciers in the Antarctic
and in Greenland are melting much faster than expected, andworldwide, plants are blooming several days earlier than a decade ago;
rising sea temperatures have been accompanied by a significant global increase in the most destructive hurricanes; NASA scientists have
concluded from direct temperature measurements that 2005 was the hottest year on record, with 1998 a close second; Earths warming
climate is estimated to contribute to more than 150,000 deaths and 5 million illnesses each year as disease spreads; widespread bleaching
from Texas to Trinidadkilled broad swaths of corals due to a 2-degree rise in sea temperatures. The world is slowly disintegrating,
concluded Inuit hunter Noah Metuq, who lives 30 miles from the Arctic Circle. They call it climate changebut we just call it breaking up.
From the founding of the first cities some 6,000 years ago until the beginning of the industrial revolution, carbon dioxide levels in the
atmosphere remained relatively constant at about 280 parts per million (ppm). At present they are accelerating toward 400 ppm, and by
2050 they will reach 500 ppm, about double pre-industrial levels. Unfortunately, atmospheric CO2 lasts about a century, so there is no way
immediately to reduce levels, only to slow their increase, we are thus in for significant global warming; the only debate is how much and how
serous the effects will be. As the newspaper stories quoted above show, we are already experiencing the effects of 1-2 degree warming in
more violent storms, spread of disease, mass die offs of plants and animals, species extinction, and threatened inundation of low-lying
countries like the Pacific nation of Kiribati and the Netherlands at a warming of 5 degrees or less the Greenland and West Antarctic ice sheets
could disintegrate, leading to a sea level of rise of 20 feet that would cover North Carolinas outer banks, swamp the southern third of Florida,
and inundate Manhattan up to the middle of Greenwich Village. Another catastrophic effect would be the collapse of the Atlantic
thermohaline circulation that keeps the winter weather in Europe far warmer than its latitude would otherwise allow. Economist William
Cline once estimated the damage to the United States alone from moderate levels of warming at 1-6 percent of GDP annually; severe
warming could cost 13-26 percent of GDP. But the most frightening scenario is runaway greenhouse warming,
based on positive feedback from the buildup of water vapor in the atmosphere that is both caused by and
causes hotter surface temperatures. Past ice age transitions, associated with only 5-10 degree changes in average global
temperatures, took place in just decades, even though no one was then pouring ever-increasing amounts of carbon into the
atmosphere. Faced with this specter, the best one can conclude is that humankinds continuing enhancement of
the natural greenhouse effect is akin to playing Russian roulette with the earths climate and
humanitys life support system. At worst, says physics professor Marty Hoffert of New York University, were just going
to burn everything up; were going to het the atmosphere to the temperature it was in the Cretaceous when there were crocodiles
at the poles, and then everything will collapse. During the Cold War, astronomer Carl Sagan popularized a theory of
nuclear winter to describe how a thermonuclear war between the Untied States and the Soviet Union would not only destroy both
countries but possible end life on this planet. Global warming is the post-Cold War eras equivalent of
nuclear winter at least as serious and considerably better supported scientifically. Over the
long run it puts dangers from terrorism and traditional military challenges to shame. It is a threat
not only to the security and prosperity to the United States, but potentially to the continued existence of life on this
planet.