What I say here is going to be brief because I dont want to impose on anyone.

(Since this is just an

informal note, I will end with a couple of relevant sources rather than sprinkling citations throughout,
but I would be happy to provide more if you want them.) If you are interested in these ideas, if you want
to challenge them, dispute them, learn more about them, or convince me that Im dead wrong, lets talk
over a coffee one of these days. In the teaching profession, this is what is known as a teachable
moment. I hope to rise to the occasion.

What I was trying to say yesterday is that climate change is potentially quite a bit worse than war. Why
do I think so?

To begin, climate change will make war more likely. In other words, the phenomenon that is climate
change entails the heightened prospect of war. The longer we put off heroic efforts to mitigate climate
change, the greater the likelihood of catastrophic climate change, and thus the greater prospect of war.
Indeed, there is evidence that climate is already contributing to wars in various places. In this sense,
climate change cant be any less bad than war because unchecked climate change will bring about war.
And war is war.

In addition, if climate change continues unabated, it doesnt threaten just one war; it threatens many.
Wars are worse than war.

Moreover, climate change doesnt only threaten the death, destruction, and suffering of war but also
innumerable nasty consequences, some regional, some global: droughts, fires, water shortages, floods,
collapse of the oceans fish stocks, cascading species extinction, widespread famine, spreading disease,
and population displacements that will dwarf those already inflaming the middle east, Africa, and
Europe.

In short, if we continue on the path were on, if we fail to immediately begin steep reductions of
greenhouse gasses, we are likely to experience global catastrophic climate change. The stakes are
considerably higher than any war humans have yet waged, matched only by all-out nuclear war.

I could go on but have already presumed too much of your time. Still, given the passion, and
considerable intelligence displayed in our conversation in class yesterday, and given that our
conversation might just be taken up in other quarters, I want to be as clear as I can be, as clear as a
unidirectional message through electronic media can be, about the relative (negative) value of war and
climate change.

In closing, I teach climate discourse (including climate change denial) and so would be very willing to talk
with anyone who wants to examine any aspect of what I have said or bring other ideas, data, and
arguments to the conversation. I would also be very happy to provide multiple sources for every one of
my claims and to discuss the authority of these sources (something I hope you have been learning to
consider). But dont feel any obligation or pressure to follow up with me. I wont be offended if you
dont, not in the slightest. For those who read to the conclusion, thanks for your attention. Ill look
forward to seeing you tomorrow.
With best wishes,

Prof. Babrow

As support for what Ive said, the following are links to a report summarizing relevant science recently
released by the Trump administration, the U.S. Global Change Research Program (2017) Climate Science
Special Report: Fourth National Assessment, and a US military assessment, Department of Defense
(2015) National Security Implications of Climate-Related Risks and a Changing Climate.

https://science2017.globalchange.gov/downloads/CSSR2017_FullReport.pdf

http://archive.defense.gov/pubs/150724-congressional-report-on-national-implications-of-climate-
change.pdf?source=govdelivery