When I first heard about this lawsuit I thought “finally we can get to the truth.” I’ve always believed that is climate science was ever put of trial it would fail miserably, even in front of the most scientifically illiterate jury. The “science” is truly that awful.
My my my, “what a tangled web we weave when we first practice to deceive.” Here at CO2isLife we’ve been begging for this climate change issue to be dragged into court, and it is everything we’ve been hoping for and more. The climate alarmist’s lies are simply too many and too great to withstand even the most incompetent of cross-examinations and defense lawyers. The fraud is just too obvious to anyone that takes even a cursory look at the data and conclusions.
My enthusiasm quickly was tempered when I learned it would be in San Francisco. A location conveniently chosen by the climate looters because of its well known political bias.
Unfortunately, this trial is being held in San Francisco, so it is doubtful the oil companies will be given a fair hearing. In anticipation of a show trial, Congress should have their own trial on “climate science.” Congress, after all, is who is spending all the money on this nonsense, and the taxpayers have a right to know what they are getting for their hard earned money.
If anyone knows this U.S. District Court Judge William Alsup, please send him a link to this website.
The fact that they would make that argument demonstrates they must think this San Francisco Judge is a complete idiot…but how can you blame after reviewing the 9th Circuit’s record? Liberals shop that circuit to file lawsuits because of the known corruption and incompetent judges. It is one of the most overturned circuits in the nation and that is why Liberals love it. If you want to abuse the legal system, the 9th circuit stands with open arms. That is why a failure in San Francisco will be so devastating to the climate alarmist cause. It is by far their best and most likely only chance.
After reading about Judge Alsup, and studying his questioning, my confidence began to grow.
San Francisco Judge Demonstrated a Real Understanding of Science; Vindicates KISS approach to Fighting Climate Alarmism
SF Judge Alsup presiding over CA vs. Big Oil Lawsuit asked a very interesting, and potentially, very damaging question for either the plaintiff or society at large.
Please Like, Share, Subscribe and Comment…and forward this to Judge Alsup. This lawsuit offers a fantastic opportunity to expose the myths behind CO2 caused global warming and sea level rise. If the courts are about seeking truth and justice, rarely will there be a better opportunity and a larger topic than CO2 driven climate change…Politicizing science is just as dangerous as politicizing the justice system, allowing the politicization of both will ultimately destroy our society.
My gut feeling is that Judge Alsup isn’t the puppet that the Climate Alarmists were hoping for when they shopped for a sympathetic circuit and judge. I can only hope that Judge Alsup has read up on the recent lawsuit that went against the environmentalists for deceitful tactics. These tactics simply have to end. Our judicial system should not be used as a means of extortion and looting.
Dr. Myles Allen used the following graphic of the Sperry Glacier in Glacier National Park in his sophistry exercise in the California vs Exxon Trial happening in San Francisco. He forgot to mention that in 1923 it was predicted that the glaciers would be gone from Glacier National Park by 1948. Climate alarmism is nothing new, the only problem is, this time they’ve gone all in and corrupted Science, Politics, Education, the EPA, NOAA, NASA, the Legal System, Corporate Boards and the Media to get their way.
Dr. Myles Allen must think that the San Francisco Judge is a complete fool. I just finished a post refuting many of his claims, but one example needed to be singled out. In his presentation, Dr. Myles Allen replaced the poster child Mt. Kilimanjaro, which was exposed as a fraud in the Climategate emails, with the Glacier National Park Glacier. He claimed that man-made global warming is the cause of the decline of the glacier. The problem is, Glacier National Park is in the middle of nowhere, and there is no urban heat island effect. There has been no warming in that area since 1994 and temperatures have actually been in a slight DOWNTREND!!! The judge needs to ask Dr. Myles Allen how does a glacier melt due to man-made warming when there is no warming? Just what evidence does he have to support his claim? Show me the data!!! The following headline from 1923 predicted all the glaciers would be gone from Glacier National Park by 1948.
Dr. Myles Allen must think this San Francisco judge is a complete fool. Glaciers have been disappearing long before the spike in CO2. The following article published in 1923 predicted the glaciers in Glacier National Park would be gone by 1948.
Today is truly a great day for Truth, Justice and the American way. Judge Alsup has delivered the country a great victory, and a tremendous defeat for the climate looters.
BREAKING: California judge tosses global warming lawsuit against oil companies
Judge Alsup just a few moments ago issued his Opinion and Order shutting down this ridiculous litigation against B.P., Chevron, and others.
He made it easy on himself by asserting several times that it is established, and “both sides” agree, that Global Warming is real, serious, and anthropogenic.
But that, he said, is irrelevant because the California government entities’ Nuisance theory is legally just plain crazy.
The Climate Looters can’t win in San Francisco, they won’t be able to win anywhere. The science is that bad.
At first look however the ruling doesn’t look to be a victory for the science and seems to embrace the phony Consensus position. Both the Oil Majors and the Judge seem to agree that manmade CO2 is the cause of the warming. The Oil Majors understandably look to avoid being painted as the neo-Tobacco Companies and the Judge most likely was looking to avoid a Maxine Water’s inspired mob showing up at his home.
The issue is not over science. All parties agree that fossil fuels have led to global warming and ocean rise and will continue to do so, and that eventually the navigable waters of the United States will intrude upon Oakland and San Francisco. The issue is a legal one — whether these producers of fossil fuels should pay for anticipated harm that will eventually flow from a rise in sea level.
The sole claim for relief is for “public nuisance,” a claim governed by federal common law. The specific nuisance is global-warming induced sea level rise. Plaintiffs’ theory, to repeat, is that defendants’ sale of fossil fuels leads to their eventual combustion, which leads to more carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, which leads to more global warming and consequent ocean rise.
The scope of plaintiffs’ theory is breathtaking. It would reach the sale of fossil fuels anywhere in the world, including all past and otherwise lawful sales, where the seller knew that the combustion of fossil fuels contributed to the phenomenon of global warming. While these actions are brought against the first, second, fourth, sixth and ninth largest producers of fossil fuels, anyone who supplied fossil fuels with knowledge of the problem would be liable. At one point, counsel seemed to limit liability to those who had promoted allegedly phony science to deny climate change.
The reason this is a huge victory for science is that most likely ends the ability of the Climate Looters to abuse the legal system. The Judge properly places the responsibility on Congress, not the Judiciary, to solve this problem. Why this is a victory for science is because no longer can Legal dictate determine the truth and the public policy, the science will have to pass the scrutiny of Congress, and it has 0.00% chance of ever passing public scrutiny. The reason the Climate Looters chose to use the legal route instead of Congress is that they know the science won’t withstand public scrutiny. It is far more likely that the looters could find an ignorant liberal judge to rule in their favor than to defend their “science” on C-SPAN for all the world to see. Exposing the supporting science to the public would destroy any hope they ever had of winning. Even the most scientifically illiterate person on the face of the earth will see through the fraud.
It may seem peculiar that an earlier order refused to remand this action to state court on the ground that plaintiffs’ claims were necessarily governed by federal law, while the current order concludes that federal common law should not be extended to provide relief. There is, however, no inconsistency. It remains proper for the scope of plaintiffs’ claims to be decided under federal law, given the international reach of the alleged wrong and given that the instrumentality of the alleged harm is the navigable waters of the United States. Although the scope of plaintiffs’ claims is determined by federal law, there are sound reasons why regulation of the worldwide problem of global warming should be determined by our political branches, not by our judiciary.
In sum, this order accepts the science behind global warming. So do both sides. The dangers raised in the complaints are very real. But those dangers are worldwide. Their causes are worldwide. The benefits of fossil fuels are worldwide. The problem deserves a solution on a more vast scale than can be supplied by a district judge or jury in a public nuisance case. While it remains true that our federal courts have authority to fashion common law remedies for claims based on global warming, courts must also respect and defer to the other co-equal branches of government when the problem at hand clearly deserves a solution best addressed by those branches. The Court will stay its hand in favor of solutions by the legislative and executive branches. For the reasons stated, defendants’ motion to dismiss is GRANTED.
Please Like, Share, Subscribe and Comment