Pirate's Cove

Well, of course they do, because their lawyers and Luddite group overall would stand to benefit, all while refusing to give up their own use of fossil fuels

The Case for Climate Reparations
Who should pay the costs for climate-change-related disasters?

(skipping past the long human drama stories about people who’ve dealt with weather related incidents, which never happened before fossil fuels, you know. And there are more throughout the screed)

The debate over climate accountability is not new. In the late 1980s, when climatologists were still trying to determine the magnitude of the risks from industrial greenhouse gas emissions, academics and policy specialists began calling attention to the fact that the alteration of the planet’s atmosphere would lead to unequal harms, and that basic principles of fairness would require that those harms be compensated. The issue of “loss and damage” entered into the formal United Nations–sponsored climate negotiations in 2007, when the Bali Action Plan suggested that wealthy nations take (unspecified) steps to assist “particularly vulnerable” countries. The Bali Action Plan established the idea—at least in theory—that the rich countries that have built their wealth by burning fossil fuels should help the poorer nations that are suffering disproportionate harms from a distorted atmosphere.

“Climate change reparations” is the shorthand for this claim—reparations meaning, basically, “a rectification of past and ongoing harms.” A plainer word would be justice. But justice is elusive, difficult to calculate, and often impossible to enforce. The notion of climate reparations, also referred to as “climate restitution,” has proved radioactive within international climate change talks, as richer nations resist acknowledging the responsibilities they may hold.

Then lots of yammering about weather which is all Bad now, because shut up, we said so, why are you questioning us? And they get into what they call the “Carbon Barrons”, essentially fossil fuels companies and all those associated with the fossil fuels business

The new climate restitution lawsuits enjoy advantages their predecessors didn’t. Although the lawsuits are ambitious in their goals, they are relatively modest in their tactics. The municipal and county lawsuits rest on middle-of-the-road tort law surrounding product liability and the “polluter pays” principle. The lawsuits claim that the Carbon Barons caused public and private nuisances when they failed to disclose the inherent dangers of fossil fuel combustion, dangers that they themselves have been aware of for decades. The opening line of the New York City complaint reads, “This lawsuit is based upon the fundamental principle that a corporation that makes a product causing severe harm when used exactly as intended should shoulder the costs of abating that harm.”

As much as the Warmists try and position it as all Bad, Mankind has never gone as far forward as they have during this Holocene warm period, so, even if the Cult of Climastrology is correct that humanity is mostly/solely responsible for the slight warming, things have gone pretty well for Humanity. And weather has always happened. The CoC can’t prove that weather was better during previous times during the Holocene when there were no fossil fueled vehicles.

Anyhow, this is a long, long whiny piece of bullshit, so let’s skip to the end

THE LAW IS AN IMPERFECT extension of ethics. Tort law alone isn’t going to save the planet. Even if, after years of litigation, the pending cases succeed, the question of climate restitution may well be too large for the courtroom, the damages too vast for any single judge or jury to decide. This century will witness trillions of dollars of infrastructure and wealth destroyed in the course of unnatural disasters. Millions of human lives may be lost in heat waves, droughts, fires, and floods. Beyond the losses for human civilization, there are the damages to wild nature—the altered forests and the acidic seas. Is any settlement large enough to remedy the extinction of a species? One stumbles in trying to make such a reckoning.

Yet a reckoning must be made. While the courts are, for now, the best and most likely venue for achieving some amends, climate justice is ultimately a political problem. After all, we are not merely consumers seeking compensation for a product defect. We are citizens insisting that impunity is unacceptable in a republic governed by the rule of law. The demand for climate change reparations—that is to say, some redress for climate change’s recent past, present, and likely future damages—is the base minimum required for any accounting of a crime as insidious as the profit-driven alteration of Earth’s atmosphere.

The urgency of this attempt cannot be overstated. This effort to apportion responsibility is in a race against time and the implacable physics of Earth’s vast systems. The longer the Carbon Barons are able to delay justice, the sooner a worse judgment will come for all of us, the innocent as well as the guilty.

They’re selling a product people want. A product most Warmists refuse to give up for their own lives. I suggest that all Warmists sell their fossil fueled vehicle, and, if there’s a profit, donate it to….well, no one really knows where. And, they should take one quarter of their yearly salary and donate it to ….. well, again, no one really knows. Because this whole thing is just an attempt to create a shakedown, which will harm the middle class and the poor. It won’t hurt the rich people who push as this Cult of Climastrology garbage.

Read: The Sierra Club Wants Climate Reparations Or Something »