Climate Alarmists Got HAMMERED in Court
For the pansy-ass climate change numskulls, I suggest you read the following.
As the cautionary saying goes, “Be careful what you wish for!”.
As the Wall Street Journal reports, the climate change clowns got their day in court…sort of.
Five American oil companies find themselves in a San Francisco courtroom. California v.Chevron is a civil action brought by the city attorneys of San Francisco and Oakland, who accuse the defendants of creating a “public nuisance” by contributing to climate change and of conspiring to cover it up so they could continue to profit.
Trending: Video Draft Is Trump Racist
The reason the state of California targeted “Big Oil” is they grew fat on the victory over Big Tobacco. They even hired, Steve W. Berman, the star trial lawyer who has made a career and a fortune suing corporations for large settlements, including the $200 billion-plus tobacco settlement in 1998.
But as Berman would find out, Big Oil wasn’t doping its products like Big Tobacco. Thus would not be an easy target.
The article continues,
No trial date has been set, but on March 21 the litigants gathered for a “climate change tutorial” ordered by Judge William Alsup —a prospect that thrilled climate-change alarmists. Excited spectators gathered outside the courtroom at 6 a.m., urged on by advocates such as the website Grist, which declared “Buckle up, polluters! You’re in for it now,” and likened the proceeding to the 1925 Scopes Monkey Trial.
One would think that a judge, ok any judge in the Land of Fruits, Nuts, and Fairies would be the hanging judge for the Big Polluters.
Judge Alsup aptly fit the bill. Judge for the U. S. District Court, Northern District of California. Alsup was nominated by William J. Clinton on March 24, 1999, to a seat vacated by Thelton Eugene Henderson. The Senate confirmed Alsup on July 30, 1999, and received commission on August 17, 1999.
So the climate-change frauds lined things up nicely. A Clinton-appointee judge indoctrinated to the California way. Easy right?
As the article points out, perhaps not.
Judge Alsup started quietly. He flattered the plaintiffs’ first witness, Oxford physicist Myles Allen, by calling him a “genius,” but he also reprimanded Mr. Allen for using a misleading illustration to represent carbon dioxide in the atmosphere and a graph ostensibly about temperature rise that did not actually show rising temperatures.
Ouch. Strike one.
I’m not one to tell a man how to do his job, but Berman should have prepared his client better. Couldn’t the climate-change clowns cook up some crooked data? Oh wait, they are now under oath.
Next, as the article continues,
Then the pointed questions began. Gary Griggs, an oceanographer at the University of California, Santa Cruz, struggled with the judge’s simple query: “What do you think caused the last Ice Age?”
The professor talked at length about a wobble in the earth’s orbit and went on to describe a period “before there were humans on the planet,” which “we call hothouse Earth.” That was when “all the ice melted. We had fossils of palm trees and alligators in the Arctic,” Mr. Griggs told the court. He added that at one time the sea level was 20 to 30 feet higher than today.
Mr. Griggs then recounted “a period called ‘snow ballers,’ ” when scientists “think the entire Earth was frozen due to changes in things like methane released from the ocean.”
Bear in mind these accounts of two apocalyptic climate events that occurred naturally came from a witness for plaintiffs looking to prove American oil companies are responsible for small changes in present-day climate.
I’m not sure if these plaintiff’s witnesses understand the game. They are there to blame pending doom on Chevron, and not vindicate the company.
But what amounts to strike three is funniest to me.
The defendants’ lawyer, Theodore J. Boutrous Jr. , emphasized the little-discussed but huge uncertainties in reports from the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and the failure of worst-case climate models to pan out in reality. Or as Judge Alsup put it: “Instead of doom and gloom, it’s just gloom.”
Mr. Boutrous also noted that the city of San Francisco—in court claiming that rising sea levels imperil its future—recently issued a 20-year bond, whose prospectus asserted the city was “unable to predict whether sea level rise or other impacts of climate change or flooding from a major storm will occur.”
Indeed strike three.
The city by the bay admits in a very legal and “forward-looking” document that they have no idea about climate change.
Three Nolan Ryan heaters, one two three, right in the face of climate farce.
Things won’t get any better for the climate-change frauds. No longer will they be able to merely present data without backing it up.