They most likely will prevail. NY has to prove its case, and Global Warming changes are historical, and not directly correlated to human activity. The state can’t adequately prove oil cos. are responsible to any significant degree. If anyone disagrees, please post your data and studies in lieu of posting a down vote and running away from the debate.
The NYC v. BP court case had the same bit of worthless ‘conspiracy evidence’ in it that the Oakland v. BP case had, which the Oakland judge rejected. I covered that whole situation here: “If California v. BP Implodes via Insufficient Evidence, so can New York City v. BP” http://gelbspanfiles.com/?p=6587
But NYC lawyer, Matthew Pawa is mentioned here — don’t make the mistake of simply letting that name slide by, he is instead a window into the world of the 20 year+ effort to distract the public away from the climate assessments from skeptic scientists by falsely calling those scientists ‘shills of industry.’ See: “Pawa’s pro-/anti-Gelbspan Weirdness” http://gelbspanfiles.com/?p=6864 . Then have a look at “Al Gore’s 1994 ABC News Nightline ‘Crooked Skeptics’ Name-Calling Failure” http://gelbspanfiles.com/?p=6997 , and you’ll have a better idea of why all of these global warming lawsuits have the potential of going down in flames ….. provided we return to a mainstream media doing the job they were supposed to do.
Let’s hope our energy industry prevails against dysfunctional NY and their Progressive Socialist governor.
They most likely will prevail. NY has to prove its case, and Global Warming changes are historical, and not directly correlated to human activity. The state can’t adequately prove oil cos. are responsible to any significant degree. If anyone disagrees, please post your data and studies in lieu of posting a down vote and running away from the debate.
The NYC v. BP court case had the same bit of worthless ‘conspiracy evidence’ in it that the Oakland v. BP case had, which the Oakland judge rejected. I covered that whole situation here: “If California v. BP Implodes via Insufficient Evidence, so can New York City v. BP” http://gelbspanfiles.com/?p=6587
But NYC lawyer, Matthew Pawa is mentioned here — don’t make the mistake of simply letting that name slide by, he is instead a window into the world of the 20 year+ effort to distract the public away from the climate assessments from skeptic scientists by falsely calling those scientists ‘shills of industry.’ See: “Pawa’s pro-/anti-Gelbspan Weirdness” http://gelbspanfiles.com/?p=6864 . Then have a look at “Al Gore’s 1994 ABC News Nightline ‘Crooked Skeptics’ Name-Calling Failure” http://gelbspanfiles.com/?p=6997 , and you’ll have a better idea of why all of these global warming lawsuits have the potential of going down in flames ….. provided we return to a mainstream media doing the job they were supposed to do.