Posted on 05/07/2014 11:40:19 AM PDT by stirrinthepuddin
Just heard Rush talk about this so I went and looked it up!
YORBA LINDA, Calif. — Documents released Friday by the Nixon Presidential Library show members of President Richard Nixon's inner circle discussing the possibilities of global warming more than 30 years ago.
Adviser Daniel Patrick Moynihan, notable as a Democrat in the administration, urged the administration to initiate a worldwide system of monitoring carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, decades before the issue of global warming came to the public's attention.
There is widespread agreement that carbon dioxide content will rise 25 percent by 2000, Moynihan wrote in a September 1969 memo.
"This could increase the average temperature near the earth's surface by 7 degrees Fahrenheit," he wrote. "This in turn could raise the level of the sea by 10 feet. Goodbye New York. Goodbye Washington, for that matter."
(Excerpt) Read more at nydailynews.com ...
Sorry for the double post!
This is an example of why I, as a nOOb was warned about walking softly in this forum.
There are many good folks here but there are others who seem to want to jump on a poster the very first chance they get?
If a person is not clear on a post, it is usually good manners to ask the person to explain themselves first .. isn’t it?
Yes, but at the time a lot of people, even Milton Friedman, thought that was a good idea. But it wasn’t IMO.
Walking softly isn't necessary, in fact by being as clear & direct as possible you'll be better off.
Oh, and thick skin helps too.
“Goodbye New York. Goodbye Washington,”
Put in SF and we have a winner.
my reply is nixon was given bad information on a number of things.
There is widespread agreement that carbon dioxide content will rise 25 percent by 2000, Moynihan wrote in a September 1969 memo.
“This could increase the average temperature near the earth’s surface by 7 degrees Fahrenheit,” he wrote. “This in turn could raise the level of the sea by 10 feet. Goodbye New York. Goodbye Washington, for that matter.”
Aaaaaand, you Fk Tards have been proven wong at very twurn....
Lighten up Francis.
and Toughen up.
Baptism is given to all nOOb’s.
Ahmni Dahmni....
I recall Charlton Heston complaining about how hot it was at night because of “the greenhouse effect” in the 1973 movie Soylent Green.
“This could increase the average temperature near the earth’s surface by 7 degrees Fahrenheit,” he wrote. “This in turn could raise the level of the sea by 10 feet. Goodbye New York. Goodbye Washington, for that matter.”
Thats right. Get our hopes up and then smash them all to pieces.
Nixon gifted us the EPA. There are few agencies that have harmed Americans less.
headline sux.... missing the word “was” ..nothing in the article about Nixon saying anything.
And Moynihan was a RAT.
First, welcome to FR stirrinthepuddin.
Next, don't let my critiques of articles scare you away. In fact, the following is an example of how I typically start a post which I evidently should have done in your thread.
Thank you for referencing that article stirrinthepuddin. Please bear in mind that the following critique is directed at the article and not at you.
The problem is that many journalists are evidently not aware of the federal government's constitutionally limited powers. Consequently they don't dig deep enough in their analysis of the federal government's constitutionally indefensible expansions of power, the EPA a good example of that.
Note that in order for Nixon to establish the EPA that he needed to do the following in compliance with the Constitution's Article V. Nixon needed to inspire Congress to propose an appropriate environmental amendment to the Constitution to the states for ratification. And if the states had chosen to ratify "Nixon's" amendment then Congress would have had the constitutional authority to legislatively address intrastate environmental issues and Nixon would have been a hero.
So the EPA is not the concern of my critique as much as it was wrongly established outside the framework of the Constitution by the Constitution-ignoring legislative and executive branches.
I think you meant "more," but I share the sentiment.
Nixon was a political opportunist who said "Run right to win the nomination, and left to win the election."
Welcome to Free Republic!
No I meant “less”. All the federal regulatory agencies cause harm and are unconstitutional. Congress cannot delegate the authority to write law.
Why would somebody talking to Nixon in the 80s be classified? Oh wait, the writer can’t do simple math.
There are few agencies that have harmed Americans more (than the EPA).
When you use "less" it sounds like a lot of agencies have harmed Americans more than the EPA, meaning there are worse agencies than the EPA.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.