A federal judge overseeing a lawsuit dismissed a core section plaintiffs brought in the case — oil companies conspired to cover up global warming science.
San Francisco and Oakland filed suit against five major companies, including Exxon and Chevron, demanding money for damages global warming allegedly caused. A core component of their suit is fossil fuel companies “engaged in a large-scale, sophisticated advertising and public relations campaign” to promote fossil fuels while they “knew” their products would contribute to “dangerous global warming.”
The cities’ suits against oil companies, however, do not show an industry conspiracy to suppress climate science from the public, U.S. District Judge William Alsup said, according to journalists who attended the hearing.
Anyone who remembers what happened to California’s reservoir system (R.I.P.) knows that this isn’t over.
Judge after judge after judge laughed the delta smelt complaint (complete junk science) out of court, but they just kept judge shopping until they found one loony enough to rule in their favor.
And that was that.
Now the stage is set, and I can almost guarantee that they’ll be repeating that strategy again and again.
What damage has oil companies done to contribute to “global warming” that state owned public utilities haven’t done?
How about the massive fleet of state owned vehicles and equipment? How about the massive piles of waste municipalities have thrown into landfills?
It’s like having an obscene high tax on tobacco then sue tobacco companies for health care costs. And the plaintiff wins.
well, some one had to do the smokers thinking for them, they can’t think for them selves, just ask the liar…erm lawyers who represented the plaintiffs :-))
For the oil companies to have been misleading anyone, they would have had to have been privy to private information no one else had access to. Instead they relied on public data, which is why all of this is bunkum, and fascism at that.
‘judge shopping’ and that dear SDA, is a M-A-J-O-R problem with the ‘justice’ cystem. and yes, note the spelling.
How about the massive piles of waste municipalities have thrown into landfills?
I’m facing that issue right now. I’m in the process of clearing out the house I inherited from my father and I’ve accumulated a collection of “mystery meat” chemicals which aren’t labelled or can’t be identified.
I contacted the local authorities about what to do with them and the best answer I got was to pour it onto kitty litter (assuming that there won’t be any chemical reaction with the stuff), put it into a plastic garbage bag, and dump it in a landfill. I’m sure someone can see the problems with that idea.
It appears that the best way of disposing of it is to take it by road to Edmonton where, at least, there’s an incinerator. However, I don’t fancy loading up the back of my pickup truck with that stuff and driving with it for several hours.
So much for concern for the environment.
That is terrible advice to give you.
There should be a chemical testing company around. If you can’t find one, contact a University and see if they have expertise and perhaps a HazMat disposal service to use.
What is shocking … is that Judge Alsup is about as Leftist as Leftist can be … but … he ALSO happens to have more training in math and science than the average Judge who received an undergraduate degree in Romantic Languages. But this ruling came out of the 9th Circuit … the most OVERTURNED Court (by the SCOTUS) in America. Every 9th Circuit Judge would love to see our country ruled by a Leftist Premiere, approved and installed by the Judges. Screw voting! Too many mouth breathers in fly over States for them.
Nevertheless … I am SHOCKED!
The major oil companies are part of the scam. They consider themselves to be ENERGY companies and if oil isn’t cutting it there is nothing wrong with windmills or solar panels or…..
Hmmm, wonder what kind of suit should be brought against people that believe in AGW but continue to produce CO2? 😉
Right you are, Alyric.
Just like judge after judge after judge threw out the lawsuits against tobacco companies, until just one of them ruled (irrationally) for the plaintiff. After that, every suit against tobacco was successful, and was a major windfall to the lawyers.
Deja Vu all over again.
As far as I know, the people studying the harmful effects of tobacco weren’t killing more people in their studies than tobacco itself was.
…which is what was happening with the delta smelt. The activists were killing ~3,000 per year to conclude that the reservoirs were killing ~300 per year. They kept this up for over a decade.
In their study, they portrayed killing ~3,000 per year during their study as well within sustainable practice, and the ~300 per year the reservoir was killing as disastrous and apocalyptic.
The comparison simply does not hold up.