It’s pretty standard fare (with too few notable exceptions) for the GOP to take anti-science stances on topics like evolution and, more recently, global warming. From my perspective, it’s interesting to note that those candidates who have declared global warming to be false are taking a position that’s contrary to that of the military — the people who have a vested interest in the science as far as it involves the security of the US, and who do not have to take positions in order to “align” themselves with voters.

This is a video of the Oceanographer of the Navy, RADM David Titley, who was formerly the commanding officer of the Meteorology and Oceanography command (i.e. my boss, several levels up). It also turns out that I grew up less than a mile from him, and while I am junior enough that our paths did not cross in high school, a younger brother of his was my patrol leader in the Boy Scouts. It made for an interesting exchange when I got a chance meet him when he toured the lab — a comment from left field (not being related to the science and technology) and it took him a second to mentally shift gears and process it.

Anyway, he was a skeptic until he got a good look at the science, and now it’s his job (and others) to worry about the impacts of global warming on our nation’s defense. So I wonder how a GOP candidate — who usually comes with a “strong on defense” label already attached, would reconcile these opposing positions? Are they really willing to weaken our defense by ignoring global warming? Would voters be swayed from a denialist stance, knowing that the navy accepted it as good and valid science and takes it very seriously?

Oceanographer for the U.S. Navy, RADM David Titley discusses the hot topic of climate change, and its impending ramifications on national security. Listen as he details some of the top facts and figures you should know about climate change and your future, explained in terms that even the most unfamiliar with science would be able to understand.

I love the observation that ~390 ppm, dismissed as inconsequential by global warming denialists, is enough to get you a bit drunk if it’s alcohol in the blood.