Our Climate has Always and is Constantly Changing, man cannot affect it. The Climate Change Scam has nothing to do with the Climate but everything to do with POWER over the people. They can only take the power if we give it to them and allow the Devil another Foothold in our Country's Destruction.
MEMORANDUM
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
September 17, 1969
FOR JOHN EHRLICHMAN
As with so many of the more interesting environmental questions,
we really don't have very satisfactory measurements of the carbon
dioxide problem. On the other hand, this very clearly is a problem,
and, perhaps most particularly, is one that can seize the imagination
of persons normally indifferent to projects of apocalyptic change.
The process is a simple one. Carbon dioxide in the atmosphere has
the effect of a pane of glass in a greenhouse. The C02 content is
normally in a stable cycle, but recently man has begun to introduce
instability through the burning of fossil fuels. At the turn of the
century several persons raised the question whether this would
change the temperature of the atmosphere. Over the years the
hypothesis has been refined, and more evidence has corne along to
support it. It is now pretty clearly agreed that the C02 content will
rise 25% by 2000. This could increase the average temperature
near the earth' s surface by 7 degrees Fahrenheit. This in turn
could raise the level of the sea by 10 feet. Goodbye New York.
Goodbye Washington, for that matter. We have no data on Seattle.
It is entirely possible that there will be countervailing effects. For
example, an increase of dust in the atmosphere would tend to lower
temperatures, and might offset the C02 effect. Similarly, it is
possible to conceive fairly mammoth man-made efforts to countervail
the C02 rise. (E. g., stop burning fossil fuels. )
In any event, I would think this is a subject that the Administration
ought to get involved with. It is a natural for NATO. Perhaps the
first order of business is to begin a worldwide monitoring system.
At present, I believe only the United States is doing any serious
monitoring, and we have only one or two stations.
Hugh Heffner knows a great deal about this, as does also the estimable
Bob White, head of the U.S. Weather Bureau. (Teddy White's brother.)
The Environmental Pollution Panel of the Pre sident ' s Science Advisory
Committee reported at length on the subject in 1965. I attach their
conclusions.
Daniel p. Moynihan
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
September 17, 1969
FOR JOHN EHRLICHMAN
As with so many of the more interesting environmental questions,
we really don't have very satisfactory measurements of the carbon
dioxide problem. On the other hand, this very clearly is a problem,
and, perhaps most particularly, is one that can seize the imagination
of persons normally indifferent to projects of apocalyptic change.
The process is a simple one. Carbon dioxide in the atmosphere has
the effect of a pane of glass in a greenhouse. The C02 content is
normally in a stable cycle, but recently man has begun to introduce
instability through the burning of fossil fuels. At the turn of the
century several persons raised the question whether this would
change the temperature of the atmosphere. Over the years the
hypothesis has been refined, and more evidence has corne along to
support it. It is now pretty clearly agreed that the C02 content will
rise 25% by 2000. This could increase the average temperature
near the earth' s surface by 7 degrees Fahrenheit. This in turn
could raise the level of the sea by 10 feet. Goodbye New York.
Goodbye Washington, for that matter. We have no data on Seattle.
It is entirely possible that there will be countervailing effects. For
example, an increase of dust in the atmosphere would tend to lower
temperatures, and might offset the C02 effect. Similarly, it is
possible to conceive fairly mammoth man-made efforts to countervail
the C02 rise. (E. g., stop burning fossil fuels. )
In any event, I would think this is a subject that the Administration
ought to get involved with. It is a natural for NATO. Perhaps the
first order of business is to begin a worldwide monitoring system.
At present, I believe only the United States is doing any serious
monitoring, and we have only one or two stations.
Hugh Heffner knows a great deal about this, as does also the estimable
Bob White, head of the U.S. Weather Bureau. (Teddy White's brother.)
The Environmental Pollution Panel of the Pre sident ' s Science Advisory
Committee reported at length on the subject in 1965. I attach their
conclusions.
Daniel p. Moynihan
This Letter show the Communists hard at work, were planning how to best destroy our country from within and have the people help promote the lie!
For a period of 26 years starting in the 1970s, scientists at Exxon Mobil produced internal studiesOpens in a new tab that purport to estimate the impact of fossil fuels on global warming.
However, an examination of Exxon’s corporate archives shows repeated references by top executives to “those graphs and math stuff we fabricated at the behest of our natural ideological allies at the Chinese Communist Party. By doing this we will please our masters in Peking [Beijing] and also make this company less profitable. So a double win.”
However, an examination of Exxon’s corporate archives shows repeated references by top executives to “those graphs and math stuff we fabricated at the behest of our natural ideological allies at the Chinese Communist Party. By doing this we will please our masters in Peking [Beijing] and also make this company less profitable. So a double win.”
It was Al Gore he began the fuss over climate change and global warming a few years ago. In 2014, it was predicted that we would start to see some of the effects of the wagon. Some said that it would be the hottest year that we have ever had, but the fact of the matter is, it was not. What are the dangers that come with global warming? What makes this such a concern for so many people?
Global warming threatens to take away jobs as well as money
People are not as cautious when cold weather rolls in, thinking that it is not actually as cold as it is.
Global warming threatened various animals and oceans as well as plant life.
Global warming may have negative effects on mountains and other natural sources.
Global warming is certainly nothing that we want to play around with. There are many risks that come with it. But the fact of the matter is that global warming is probably not something that you should be at all concerned about.
Let’s look at the top 10 reasons why all of the talks you are hearing of climate change is nothing more than a huge hoax. After you read this information, you can decide for yourself whether you believe the hype or if you agree with most others and say that it is nothing more than a big hoax...MORE
Global warming threatens to take away jobs as well as money
People are not as cautious when cold weather rolls in, thinking that it is not actually as cold as it is.
Global warming threatened various animals and oceans as well as plant life.
Global warming may have negative effects on mountains and other natural sources.
Global warming is certainly nothing that we want to play around with. There are many risks that come with it. But the fact of the matter is that global warming is probably not something that you should be at all concerned about.
Let’s look at the top 10 reasons why all of the talks you are hearing of climate change is nothing more than a huge hoax. After you read this information, you can decide for yourself whether you believe the hype or if you agree with most others and say that it is nothing more than a big hoax...MORE
Two prominent climate scientists have taken on new rules from the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) on cutting carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions in electricity generation, arguing in testimony that the regulations “will be disastrous for the country, for no scientifically justifiable reason.”
Citing extensive data (pdf) to support their case, William Happer, professor emeritus in physics at Princeton University, and Richard Lindzen, professor emeritus of atmospheric science at Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), argued that the claims used by the EPA to justify the new regulations aren’t based on scientific facts but rather political opinions and speculative models that have consistently proven to be wrong...MORE
Citing extensive data (pdf) to support their case, William Happer, professor emeritus in physics at Princeton University, and Richard Lindzen, professor emeritus of atmospheric science at Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), argued that the claims used by the EPA to justify the new regulations aren’t based on scientific facts but rather political opinions and speculative models that have consistently proven to be wrong...MORE
Stuart Varney: Environmentalism is a religion, the greens insist you worship at their church
Guest Column: Man-made global warming is a hoax
We have failed our children by allowing them to be taught that the hypothesis of man-made global warming is settled science. In 2013, President Barack Obama sent out a tweet claiming 97% of climate experts believe global warming is “real, man-made and dangerous.” As it turns out, the survey he was referring to didn’t ask that question, so he was basically making it up.
We have spent ourselves into massive debt for a hypothesis without verifying that man-made global warming really exists. To quote Michael Crichton “I regard consensus science as an extremely pernicious development that ought to be stopped cold in its tracks. Historically, the claim of consensus has been the first refuge of scoundrels; it is a way to avoid debate by claiming that the matter is already settled. Whenever you hear the consensus of scientists agrees on something or other, reach for your wallet, because you’re being had.” “Let’s be clear: ...MORE
We have spent ourselves into massive debt for a hypothesis without verifying that man-made global warming really exists. To quote Michael Crichton “I regard consensus science as an extremely pernicious development that ought to be stopped cold in its tracks. Historically, the claim of consensus has been the first refuge of scoundrels; it is a way to avoid debate by claiming that the matter is already settled. Whenever you hear the consensus of scientists agrees on something or other, reach for your wallet, because you’re being had.” “Let’s be clear: ...MORE
Refuting 12 Claims Made by Climate Alarmists
Many climate change scientists do not agree that global warming is happening
Whether most scientists outside climatology believe that global warming is happening is less relevant than whether the climatologists do. A letter signed by over 50 leading members of the American Meteorological Society warned about the policies promoted by environmental pressure groups. “The policy initiatives derive from highly uncertain scientific theories. They are based on the unsupported assumption that catastrophic global warming follows from the burning of fossil fuel ...MORE
