government's 2014 national climate assessment, average temperatures have increased by as much as 1.9 degrees fahrenheit in the u.s. since 1895, with most of the increase occurring since 1970. temperatures are projected to rise another 2 to 4 degrees in most areas of the country in the next few decades. people are

government's national climate assessment report which was just released sos that things are actually even worse than previously thought the trumpet administration which has shown skepticism at best about the impact of global warming on our climate has done many things to actually for efforts to address the dire circumstances including the president himself as we were just discussing with katie rem a row pulling out of the paris climate accord signed by roughly two hundred nations to try and reverse the negative impacts of global warming that said the administration could have tried to throw this effort this important study they didn't like it and they could have tried to stop it from being released and they did it i often talk about discord in this town in washington d.c. it's worse than i've ever seen it in thirty five years but this example shows that there is some civility when it comes to important science and i commend the administration for releasing the report it isn't in line with what they want but they still released it for years i thought that there is actually a free marke

government's 2014 national climate assessment, average temperatures have increased by as much as 1.9 degrees fahrenheit in the u.s. since 1895, with most of the increase occurring since 1970. temperatures are projected to rise another 2 to 4 degrees in most areas of the country in the next few decades. people are already feeling the impact, these early effects of climate change a harbinger of what the future may hold. >> if you're on the coast, most likely it's sea level rise. if you're in the midwest, extreme heat-wave events. extreme flooding and precipitation in the midwest. the heaviest rain events are getting 30% heavier. the folks in the rocky mountain west, they're not gonna recognize the forest even 60 years hence. we're losing most of the pine trees in the southern part of the rocky mountain forests in future projections 'cause it's getting too hot and too dry. >> it's very clear to us that the climate is changing, changing rapidly, and changing primarily because of human activities. the science tells us that. extreme events are one of the most important parts of our changin

government's national climate assessment a report which is issued every four years as mandated by congress points to an even greater threat from global warming that he.

government's national climate assessment a report which is issued every four years as mandated by congress points to an even greater threat from global warming that has been shown in the past temperatures in europe and north america are the highest they have been in eleven thousand years which is leading to rising sea levels and greater frequency of storms like we witnessed this past hurricane season the assessment involved hundreds of scientists in the government and universities professor katharine hayhoe of texas test university told the financial times that quote we've been smoking fossil fuels for hundreds of years the report is an x. ray of our lungs. we are in a very serious condition it's all a bit more on that by the way at the end before we go. what via a small country of two million people has been a big banking center and they have since had become independent from the former soviet union in one nine hundred ninety one but some recent news has tarnished a previously stellar reputation central bank governor bill maher is rib civic's has been accused of soliciting a bribe and the

government's national climate assessment a report which is issued every four years as mandated by congress points to an even greater threat from global warming that has been shown in the past temperatures in europe and north america are the highest they have been in the eleven thousand years which is leading to rising sea levels and greater frequency of storms like we witnessed this past hurricane season the assessment involved hundreds of scientists in the government and universities.

the federal government's third national climate assessment found that, and i quote, climate disruption to agricultural production have increased in the past 40 years and are projected to increase over the next 25 years. by midcentury and beyond, these impacts will be increasingly negative on crops and livestock, closed quote. the report issued in november of 2017 confirmed these trends. i look forward to hearing the testimony of our witnesses on this topic. other environmental programs have created new income opportunities for farmers. the renewable fuel standard has been a major economic driver in farm communities across our country. in addition, tens of thousands of farmers across our country are enrolled in usda's conservation programs that pay farmers for the water quality and habitat conservation services they provide and protect. i acknowledge, though, that sometimes environmental requirements can be complex. the chairman's referred to this already. but those requirements can be confusing to those who farm. one such example is the air emissions reporting requirement for farms und

it was the framework based on the current national climate assessment predictions and the impact to alaska as a state that is seeing the impact of climate change as warming temperatures, you might not feel it here in the east coast but it's warmer back home and it outlines some of the potential health effects that could be coming our way several decades out. we recognize that. but one of the concerns, of course, is vector borne or infectious diseases that are particularly associated with vector borne, usually we're able to freeze those nasty mosquitoes and they can't move these levels of outbreaks but it is something that as we think about public health emergencies we're so focused on the here and the now and the disaster of the day but i do think it's important that we be -- we be thinking long-term about the changes that might be headed our direction. >> thank you, senator murkowski. senator jones? >> thank you, mr. chairman. once again, thank you for your time to this committee. following up on i think senator casey may have highlighted and senator murkowski was talking about the rural

climate on our threat assessment resources and readiness. i want to commend you for those statements. however, both the president's national security strategy and the departments national defense strategy they'll to note climate change as a threats. i am perplexed by that and, certainly ask why was that omitted, but as these changes occur, how will you ensure the department is prepared to respond. what steps will the department take to mitigate the challenges to ensure america's emission resiliency? on a military level, every base we have has what we call extreme weather plans. we acknowledge any type of environmental impacts from the weather. whether it is draining systems or whatever we need to keep the base operating. airfield, seaport, marshall in bases for deployment. this is a normal part of what the military does. under any strategy, it is part and parcel. perplexing that it was left out of the national defense strategy. turn tosilva, let me part of your testimony. boasty nuclear weapons the only existential military threat to our nation. i would add cyber weapons as also posing and existential and asymmetric threat

climate on our threat assessments, resources and readiness. i want to commend you for those statements. however, both the president's national security strategy and the department's national defense strategy failed to note climate change as a threat. i'm perplexed by that and certainly ask why was that omitted. as these changes occur, how will you insure the department is prepared to respond? what steps will the department take to mitigate the challenges of a changing land and seascape to insure america's mission resiliency and assurance? >> congressman, on a military level, every base we have has what we call extreme weather plans. we acknowledge any kind of environmental impact from the weather, whatever drainage system we need to keep that base operating, airports, seaports, marshaling bases for deployment. this is a normal part of what the military does. under any strategy it is part and parcel. >> i still find it perplexing it was left out of the national defense strategy. but general selva, let me turn to part of your testimony, i might take issue with one part of it, you say nuclear weapons pose the only exceptional t

assessment without by the u.s. intelligence community. pages six includes a serious warning about climate change. here is the assessment, something the director of nationalelligence talked about when he presented this to members of congress recently. i have seen portions of that assessment. as far as i know, dan coats is a former u.s. senator. he is not a scientist. there are thousands of scientists that say that conclusion is wrong. that is part of the assessment process to review. you have the city of oakland that says on one hand they have a massive problem. they are suing oil companies because they will have massive increases in sea level, 100 year flood every week, but in their bond statements, they are saying there is really no problem. there is alarmism going on. we are hopeful the administration will move forward on this concept and look closely at the science of the matter. i think all americans in agree, what is the science? wase really know if al gore right 20 years ago when he predicted the ice caps would melt? he was wrong about that. we should assess any risks. when you have city of oakland and other cities planning and lawsuits they will h

climate around north korea but their request with ignored. the national security agency spent -- sent is visiting wanting warning that this minimal risk assessment was not appropriate for the pueblo mission. this mission -- message also ignored. the head of the green division of the airport security services kept on the messages he received about the pueblo mission in a folder that he labeled operation suicide. of navalop ranks intelligence, although one size went over work. number seven, you may not know what happened in 1968. after an uneventful first two weeks, the public took a position outside of the harbor on january 22. two north korean military shows approached and circled the pueblo at a distance of 25 yards. and they turned a public -- abruptly. they had been spotted. the commander did not panic, his ship was in international waters. having display no evidence of his nationality and no one noticed any signs of hostility. they have been wants to expect some kind of restaurant. that is standard on these types of missions. ordersblo's operation were that this should not be scared off by these. no action shall be taken that would give the

climate change. wond fer the president has read this. here is the worldwide threat assessment. this is something that the director of the national intelligence talked about when he presented this to members of congress recently. guest: yeah. i've seen portions of that assessment. as far as i know he is a former u.s. snorks not a scientist. there are thousands of scientists who say that conclusion is wrong. that is part of the assessment process to take a look and review them. on the flip side you have the city of oakland for example who says on one hand they have a massive problem. they are suing oil companies because they're going to have massive increases in a rise in sea level, a hundred-year flood every week, but in their bond statement they say there is really no problem here. there's a lot of alarmism going on and that is why we are very hopeful that the administration will work forward on the red team blue team concept and look closely at the science. i think all americans can agree, what is the science? do we really know if al gore was right 20 years ago when he predicted all the ice caps would melt? he was wrong on that