New Warmist Talking Point: Figure Out Who’s To Blame And Sue Them

By this definition, we should sue the Democratic Party for creating urban slums for Black people, leaving them in poverty, misery, and violence


HOW IT USED to go was, after some extreme weather event, reporters would ask Climate McScientist, PhD whether the flood/drought/hurricane/disease outbreak/wildfire/superstorm happened because of climate change. Dr. McScientist would pat the reporter on the head and say: Well, of course, one can never ascribe any single weather event to a changing global climate. Granted, a horrifying, unprecedented natural disaster is, maybe, the sort of thing one would expect on a planet where humans have been burning hydrocarbon fuels for decades, putting carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases into the atmosphere and raising the overall temperature on Earth. Maybe.

How it used to go pre-climastrology science: a weather event or something would happen, and everyone would realize that our planet is wild. And before the science-science, they’d wonder who is the witch which caused the Bad Weather, and attempt to burn them at the stake.

It’s a future of terrifying disasters—and a future where scientists know more about the underpinnings and mechanics of those disasters. But maybe most importantly, it’s a future where you can attribute a cause. It’s a future where you can ascribe fault.

And that means you can sue the people responsible.

Of course, they’re blaming the fossil fuels companies, which provide a product that people want. That Warmists want to be able to travel long distances to ‘climate change’ conferences

A bigger question is whether courts could hold actual carbon emitters accountable for climate change-related damages. New York City, coastal cities in California, and cities in Colorado suing petrochemical companies for sea level rise and other climate change outcomes. It’s a tough case to make. In a climate “tutorial” that was part of the California cities’ lawsuit in March, Chevron’s attorney Ted Boutrous didn’t attempt to deny a single thing about the physics and chemistry of climate change, or even that human activity caused it. He just said it didn’t make sense to blame oil companies. Burning hydrocarbons doesn’t kill people; people burning hydrocarbons kills people.

And, he’s right. Perhaps we should sue all the Warmists who refuse to give up their own use of fossil fuels.

The International Energy Agency says that Earth can solve its climate problems with a $53 trillion. That money has to come from somewhere. Environmentally-minded investment practices might be one approach. So is using the courts to extract some money from the people responsible. “When people can’t get change made through other processes—dealing directly, a political process—the other branch of government is the judicial branch,” Patton says. “That’s where people go to resolve disputes.” And now science is walking in with relevant evidence.

Whoops. Partly let the cat out of the bag, that this is all simply a shakedown to have the cash to implement their Progressive (nice Fascist) policies.

Save $10 on purchases of $49.99 & up on our Fruit Bouquets at Promo Code: FRUIT49
If you liked my post, feel free to subscribe to my rss feeds.

Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed

Comments are closed.

Pirate's Cove