I look forward to the return of cases that actually matter. Since they’ve proven/ leaked more information that even the climate change scientists don’t believe man is causing climate change, how can the courts rule that companies are causing it. Maybe they should be charged for polluting…
PM is totally correct. manmade global warming is completely discredited even though the media (Reuters especially) decline to run stories that debunk the global warming myth.
The underlying complaint also clearly alleges negligence as an alternate. Precident is relatively clear that if any reading of the complaint alleges an accident, then there is coverage.
The basic idea is that there are no legitimate critics to the IPCC, and the Kivalina & Comer cases made specific claims that the ‘few’ skeptic scientists opposing the issue were on the payroll of big coal & oil. NOBODY ever checked the veracity of that accusation, and if anyone does, it is revealed that all the accusations originate with one highly questionable group of enviro-activists. It gets worse, apparently that group was working with the White House – as I detailed here just a few weeks ago: “White House Involved in Warmist Smear Campaign” http://www.americanthinker.com/2011/11/white_house_involved_in_warmist_smear_campaign.html
I look forward to the return of cases that actually matter. Since they’ve proven/ leaked more information that even the climate change scientists don’t believe man is causing climate change, how can the courts rule that companies are causing it. Maybe they should be charged for polluting…
PM is totally correct. manmade global warming is completely discredited even though the media (Reuters especially) decline to run stories that debunk the global warming myth.
The underlying complaint also clearly alleges negligence as an alternate. Precident is relatively clear that if any reading of the complaint alleges an accident, then there is coverage.
There is an entirely unreported side of this issue, a detail seen in the three major global warming lawsuit cases which I discussed at length in my online article last year, “Global Warming Nuisance Lawsuits Are Based on a Fatal Flaw” http://biggovernment.com/rcook/2010/11/27/global-warming-nuisance-lawsuits-are-based-on-a-fatal-flaw/
The basic idea is that there are no legitimate critics to the IPCC, and the Kivalina & Comer cases made specific claims that the ‘few’ skeptic scientists opposing the issue were on the payroll of big coal & oil. NOBODY ever checked the veracity of that accusation, and if anyone does, it is revealed that all the accusations originate with one highly questionable group of enviro-activists. It gets worse, apparently that group was working with the White House – as I detailed here just a few weeks ago: “White House Involved in Warmist Smear Campaign” http://www.americanthinker.com/2011/11/white_house_involved_in_warmist_smear_campaign.html