Reminiscent of the “Guns Don’t Kill People, People Kill People” argument, the 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.
In the document titled: Case 3:17-cv-06012-WHA Document 161 Filed 03/27/18, the judge asks:
If plaintiffs’ theory is correct, why wouldn’t everyone involved in supplying carbon-based fuels (or in otherwise increasing carbon dioxide, e.g., deforestation) be liable upon a showing that they questioned the science of global warming or sponsored research intending to question it?
The way this question is answered possibly puts everyone on the face of the globe at risk. Oil companies don’t produce CO2, they produce oil and gasoline.
Those products can be used for many purposes other than internal combustion. I’ve used gasoline to kill grass and as a solvent, and I’ve used oil to lubricate chains.
Using the product of Big Oil for those purposes didn’t generate CO2. Only when I decided to burn the gasoline in an internal combustion engine was CO2 created.
CO2 was created not by the production of gasoline, but by my decision to burn the gasoline.
If I buy a gun and shoot someone, we don’t prosecute the gun company, we prosecute the person that pulled the trigger.
People like Arnold Schwartzineger and Al Gore, who publically acknowledge the dangers of CO2, and then fly off in their private jets to homes that consume the energy of a small village, are potentially the most at risk.
They acknowledge the harm CO2 does, and then turn around and produce astronomical quantities of it. That is the political equivalent of a pro-life candidate having an abortion.
CO2 also isn’t the only cause of warming. The Urban Heat Island Effect is universally accepted and easily documented.
No one, skeptic or alarmist, denies that the Urban Heat Island Effect exists. If warming is the problem, shouldn’t all major causes of warming then be prosecuted?
The concrete and asphalt in LA, SF, and Oakland is the warming equivalent of billions of tons of CO2. That fact is easily documented by simply looking at the temperature trends in major cities vs untouched wooded areas nearby.
Lastly, by controlling for the Urban Heat Island Effect and H2O to isolate the impact of CO2 on temperature, it is discovered that CO2 does not impact temperatures in the lower atmosphere where all ground-based temperature measurements and most glaciers are located.
If you test the hypothesis “Man-made CO2 does not impact global temperatures” on ice-core data, the hypothesis is not rejected.
There is nothing statistically abnormal about the variability of the temperatures over the past 150 years when compared to the entire Holocene period.
Read more at CO2 Is Life
One of the most important points of this article is this CO2 is not driving warming. There is very poor historical correlation. In addition, even if CO2 was causing warming, extreme weather events are not increasing. It is these events that the law suits are seeking damages for.
A very important concept is that we hold the person(s) using the product responsible. If a hot head uses a baseball bat to break every window in a parking lot, we don’t hold the bat manufacture responsible. If CO2 was causing harm to the cities, among those held responsible should be the residence of the cities filing the suits. Agriculture, especially cattle ranchers, produce a lot of green house gasses. One of the biggest sources is from deforestation. These are other groups that would be sued if the cities were being consistent.
This article mentioned the impact of the urban heating effect on raising temperatures. This is truer than many people realize. In tampering with data NOAA has removed 75% of the weather stations from the data, mainly in rural and higher altitude locations. The result is mathematically the urban hot spots have greater influence and NOAA can say that the earth is warming.
When did California know ? So the state just keeps pouring asphalt despite the earth having a fever . These frivolous lawsuits are done on the backs of tax payers and at no risk to the little shit heads hoping for a sue and settle .
Meanwhile fuel poverty deaths in the 10’s of thousands per year
carry on with not even a peep .
At least the Judge didn’t take long to call bullshit on the eco anarchists and their lawyers hoping for a cut .
The fact is fossil fuels are the main reason for the highest quality of life in the billion plus years of this planet .
15,000 years ago North America was under a sheet of mile thick ice . No model T ‘s then , no combustion of fossil fuels , just good ol mother nature reversing course like it will do again regardless of the fumes from Al Gore and his actor pals chasing tail around the globe .
We get drawn into the CO2 discussion in order to challenge the warmists’ inanity. I read these articles and remember that CO2’s effect on temperature is nothing to minimal. Fossil fuel has a tiny role in the Earth’s carbon cycle. Without fuel, civilization as we know it is over. Any country that tries to operate without it will fail.
Our planet was warming up naturally. No one prove that it wasn’t.