BP Fears Climate Change Lawsuits in U.S.

By | May 22, 2018

  • May 22, 2018 at 11:37 am
    Cut the Bias says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 11
    Thumb down 8

    He should just say, “Fake News!” to anyone bringing a climate change lawsuit against the company.

    Lobbyists, paid-for talking heads, and idiot politicians have already convinced almost half the country that climate change isn’t real (or if that it IS real, it’s not caused or exacerbated by mankind). If they can get a jury trial, they can probably find 12 people with more fingers than teeth to decide in their favor.

    In the voir dire, they will probably just find out who is anti-vaxxer and choose them, since it takes the same mentality to stare down obvious science and consensus and say, “I don’t care, I don’t believe it anyway!”

    • May 22, 2018 at 5:11 pm
      Craig Cornell says:
      Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 3
      Thumb down 6

      I know . . . wasting my time, but:

      This year saw reputable Climate Scientists reveal that on average, climate models overestimated warming by 40%. That’s right, the projected warming is only 60% of what was projected. Meaning the rising oceans are not the scary monster we were told about.

      In addition, the models don’t account for the fact that 40% of the warming in the industrial age took place in the first 40 years of the 20th Century – when only 10% of the total CO2 produced in the Industrial Age was released.

      I could go on, but the Climate Zealots will say something stupid and go back inside Green Church.

      Question for Green Religion: how high will the oceans rise? Be precise. when will they hit the peak? How many people will die? And finally, what percentage of the ocean’s rise is man-made and what percentage is natural?

      Honest answer: 97% of Climate Scientists disagree on all of the above.

      • May 22, 2018 at 5:20 pm
        Captain Planet says:
        Like or Dislike:
        Thumb up 5
        Thumb down 2

        Craig wrote, “This year saw reputable Climate Scientists…”

        Oh yeah?

        “My best friend’s sister’s boyfriend’s brother’s girlfriend heard from this guy who knows this kid who’s going with the girl who saw Ferris pass out at 31 Flavors last night.”

        • May 22, 2018 at 5:50 pm
          Craig Cornell says:
          Like or Dislike:
          Thumb up 2
          Thumb down 6

          “The ultimate test for a climate model is the accuracy of its predictions. But the models predicted that there would be much greater warming between 1998 and 2014 than actually happened. If the models were doing a good job, their predictions would cluster symmetrically around the actual measured temperatures. That was not the case here; a mere 2.4 percent of the predictions undershot actual temperatures and 97.6 percent overshot, according to Cato Institute climatologist Patrick Michaels, former MIT meteorologist Richard Lindzen, and Cato Institute climate researcher Chip Knappenberger. Climate models as a group have been “running hot,” predicting about 2.2 times as much warming as actually occurred over 1998–2014. Of course, this doesn’t mean that no warming is occurring, but, rather, that the models’ forecasts were exaggerated.”

          • May 22, 2018 at 11:19 pm
            Captain Planet says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 5
            Thumb down 1

            Cato Institute? Really – a Koch Bros. think tank. Can you find a more biased group of “scientists”? Thank you for making our point. You can return to your Sean Hannity hour now.

          • May 23, 2018 at 2:05 pm
            Cut the Bias says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 3
            Thumb down 1

            LOL!

            This is like the time bobbo posted links from right-wing conspiracy sites to support his climate change denial. You know when you go to a site and they use more exclamation marks than periods and the ad content outweighs the site content?

            Yeah, it was one of those.

            You’ll never believe it guys, but I went to my local butcher and he said that eating red meat is healthy and that vegetables are lame and gross! Suck it, vegetarians, look like you were wrong!

          • May 29, 2018 at 4:18 pm
            bob says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 0
            Thumb down 1

            “This is like the time bobbo posted links from right-wing conspiracy sites to support his climate change denial. ”

            Never happened. What I did do is post from a site which showed that the NOAA had a history of taking down their links, and lo and behold, the links were taken down.

            You will note the point was made when Confused could not quote the data from the NOAA and it in turn came down to “which source should we trust?” and I said “the one that shows their data”.

            In regards to climate change, I have shown far more links than anyone here.

          • May 29, 2018 at 5:15 pm
            Cut the Bias says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 1
            Thumb down 0

            No, what you posted was a bunch of pseudo-science BS to back-up your claims which were frankly laughed out of the topic.

            Then, you went on a long, multi-comment rant about how much smarter you were than everyone else. It was a car crash in super slo-mo, and was frankly fantastic.

          • May 30, 2018 at 3:05 pm
            confused says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 0
            Thumb down 0

            you, bob, posted a link showing the variance in one small section of Texas when we were talking about variance across the entire planet – then you tried to argue “well, if it’s “X” in TX we can assume it’s “X” everywhere else.”

      • May 22, 2018 at 5:35 pm
        Agent says:
        Like or Dislike:
        Thumb up 4
        Thumb down 6

        Perhaps the Climate Change Hoaxers should sue the State of Hawaii for allowing that volcano to spew out smoke and ash for weeks now. Equivalent to many thousands of vehicles. By the way, volcano’s are not man’s fault either.

  • May 22, 2018 at 1:44 pm
    CCC says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 9
    Thumb down 2

    Anyone that put gasoline in their car today to drive to work is just as liable/responsible as the oil companies. If we want them to stop supplying oil, we need to eliminate the demand.

    • May 22, 2018 at 2:25 pm
      Cut the Bias says:
      Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 6
      Thumb down 2

      I wouldn’t say “just as liable” since regular automobile owners don’t lobby for lax fuel standards, hide the truth of fossil fuel’s outsized responsibility for pollution and climate change, etc.

      but, on a larger sense, I do agree that we are all part of the problem. Anytime you choose to drive instead of walk/bike/take public transit when it is a feasible option, we are contributing to the problem. Heating your home, air-conditioning, etc. It all contributes, and nobody wants to make the first change, but we are all going to pay for it, or our kids and grandkids will. Either way.

      • May 23, 2018 at 3:45 pm
        Craig Cornell says:
        Like or Dislike:
        Thumb up 2
        Thumb down 6

        You know why nobody wants to make the first change?

        Because none of you really believe it. All talk, no walk.

        Because in your heart, you know Climate Change is a very difficult subject, you know that anyone who said it was “Settled Science” is a liar, that the science is changing all the time.

        You know the climate is influenced by so many factors that you can’t possibly predict the future climate. The sun, the oceans, the trees and plants on the entire Earth, the absorption of warmth by the oceans, and the natural changes in climate that have taken place since the beginning of time – it is all so massively complex.

        And then you talk like you are a True Believer. (Rome had FDR’s New Deal! I BELIEVE!)

        • May 23, 2018 at 4:19 pm
          confused says:
          Like or Dislike:
          Thumb up 3
          Thumb down 2

          ah yes – the classic “i will tell you what you believe and this is why you are wrong” straw man argument. howz aboutz you listenz to what peoplez sayz and not put wordz in their mouthz?

          • May 23, 2018 at 6:36 pm
            Craig Cornell says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 0
            Thumb down 6

            Hello? He just said “nobody wants to make the first change”. That is exactly what I was responding to, HIS WORDS.

            Geez, no wonder you believe in Green Religion.

  • May 22, 2018 at 4:33 pm
    CCC says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 1
    Thumb down 1

    I would argue not only “just as liable,” but MORE liable. It’s silly that BP can’t even give public statements out of fear of lawsuits — from the USA of all places. It would be one thing if we as a nation were able to eliminate/outlaw all oil consumption — then I could get on board with lawsuits — but I don’t see that happening any time soon.

    The oil companies are supplying a product that everyone uses and needs. Until there is a viable alternative, we are hooked on oil, like it or not. If all the oil companies decided to “help the climate” by shutting their doors today, the world economy would collapse virtually overnight. It is offensive to me that someone can knowingly/willingly purchase and use a product they personally deem harmful, then turn around and sue the company for providing said product. Either use it knowing the ramifications, or don’t.

  • May 22, 2018 at 4:46 pm
    Rosenblatt says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 3
    Thumb down 0

    They should be fearful if there’s evidence of them intentionally hiding the dangers of their product just so they could boost their bottom line. I get the dependency on oil and all that, but what I don’t get is a company being able to willfully hide and lie about evidence with the sole purpose of making more money.

    • May 22, 2018 at 5:00 pm
      Cut the Bias says:
      Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 4
      Thumb down 0

      Well, we know Exxon-Mobil knew about its hand in climate change back in the 70s, but they buried the report until it leaked out a year ago or so.

      Humanity, as a whole, is incredibly selfish, those who are in a position of power are typically type-A and are far likelier to be sociopaths than the rest of society. A sociopath would worry more about their bottom line than their fellow man without question, so it was never really up for discussion.

  • May 23, 2018 at 3:34 pm
    Craig Cornell says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 1
    Thumb down 3

    Right, Bias. Your science degree is superior to that of 1077 geoscientists and engineers.

    So, you should be able to look down your nose at other people without having to back up your position. Because of your vast scientific background.

    In 30 years – when nothing dreadful happens from Climate Change – I can see it now. You and Al Gore will take the credit for “saving” us.

    • May 23, 2018 at 4:18 pm
      confused says:
      Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 4
      Thumb down 0

      I must have missed where you cited something to back up your position. You posted a quote, without a citation, to something that wasn’t even study. If you’re going to get on Bias for not backing up his position this one time, don’t be a hypocrite – back up your position!

      • May 23, 2018 at 6:41 pm
        Craig Cornell says:
        Like or Dislike:
        Thumb up 0
        Thumb down 5

        Citations above, AGAIN:

        The journal, Organization Studies.
        MIT
        CATO

        Want more?: the IPCC (the gold standard for Climate Zealots) said in the 2014 report on the most recent climate science, that the range of outcomes for Climate Change had expanded. Translation: they had LESS confidence in the outcomes than previously. And you know where the range increased? On the side of LESS warming and LESS rising of the oceans.

        Look it up. Can you Google “IPCC”?

        Now say something stupid. It is what Climate Zealots do in place of using facts. . .

        • May 24, 2018 at 3:11 am
          Cut the Bias says:
          Like or Dislike:
          Thumb up 5
          Thumb down 0

          So, Craig, you believe in the IPCC, MIT, and CATO, right?

          IPCC in their November 2014 report:

          http://ipcc.ch/pdf/assessment-report/ar5/syr/AR5_SYR_FINAL_SPM.pdf

          “Human influence on the climate system is clear, and recent anthropogenic emissions of greenhouse gases are the highest in history. Recent climate changes have had widespread impacts on human and natural systems.”

          and

          “Warming of the climate system is unequivocal, and since the 1950s, many of the observed changes are unprecedented over decades to millennia. The atmosphere and ocean have warmed, the amounts of snow and ice have diminished, and sea level has risen.?

          ” The period from 1983 to 2012 was likely the warmest 30-year period of the last 1400 years in the Northern Hemisphere”

          “Anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions have increased since the pre-industrial era, driven
          largely by economic and population growth, and are now higher than ever. This has led to atmospheric
          concentrations of carbon dioxide, methane and nitrous oxide that are unprecedented in
          at least the last 800,000 years. Their effects, together with those of other anthropogenic drivers,
          have been detected throughout the climate system and are extremely likely to have been
          the dominant cause of the observed warming since the mid-20th century. ”

          and

          “The evidence for human influence on the climate system has grown since the IPCC Fourth Assessment Report (AR4). It is
          extremely likely that more than half of the observed increase in global average surface temperature from 1951 to 2010 was
          caused by the anthropogenic increase in GHG concentrations and other anthropogenic forcings together.”

          and’

          “Surface temperature is projected to rise over the 21st century under all assessed emission
          scenarios. It is very likely that heat waves will occur more often and last longer, and that
          extreme precipitation events will become more intense and frequent in many regions. The
          ocean will continue to warm and acidify, and global mean sea level to rise. {2.2}”

          I could keep going on and on, but its obvious you didn’t actually read the report or know what it was even talking about.

          1. Climate Change is real. (Not wishy-washy maybe, but REAL)
          2. Man-caused sources account for at least half of all modern history warming (not invisible space rays, the tilt of the earth’s axis, sunspots, or whatever else fake reasons science doubters come up with)
          3. Under all projection types for emissions, the Earth will continue to heat up and we will also continue to see an increase in extreme weather (Their confidence and wavering in this aspect is only due to policy changes possibly enacted worldwide, innovations in science, etc.)
          4. The range of outcomes have expanded due to policy changes and countries potentially acting more responsible towards the environment (ie: the entire world, minus Syria and the United States), and those countries who put profit and spray tans first (USA! USA! USA!), not because they feel less confident in the SETTLED SCIENCE. It’s all up to humanity from here on out. We have the power to slow the effects of climate change and theoretically eventually erase it all together (man-made causes, mind you. We still have no way to stop volcanos from erupting,etc.) but it is up to governments everywhere to understand how insanely serious this real risk is for our children and our children’s children.

          Now, Craig, don’t tell me you suddenly stopped believing in the IPCC, right buddy?

          • May 24, 2018 at 8:47 am
            ??? says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 4
            Thumb down 0

            Man, that was an @ss kicker of a reply.. Not much arguing with that; not when your exact sources were used to completely contradict your point of view…

            I’m guessing the responsive will some sort of ad hominem attack, or deflection.. Should probable just stay silent on the matter after that.

        • May 24, 2018 at 8:30 am
          Cut the Bias says:
          Like or Dislike:
          Thumb up 3
          Thumb down 0

          Lol.

          http://news.mit.edu/2018/projecting-impacts-climate-change-0213

          https://www.cnn.com/2017/06/02/politics/trump-mit-study-paris-agreement/index.html

          Thank you for consistently going out and providing sources that support my fact-based commentaries.

          Please continue using the CATO Institute for all future justifications for your backwards beliefs, though. Always a smart idea to get your news from billionaire fossil fuel supporters with a large stake in the continued success of fossil fuel use and production worldwide.

          • May 24, 2018 at 8:44 am
            BBBBBBURN says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 4
            Thumb down 0

            Craig,

            Would you like some aloe for that burn?

          • May 24, 2018 at 3:17 pm
            Craig Cornell says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 0
            Thumb down 3

            Here is what you established:

            1. The Earth is warming. (Correct. The climate has always changed, and the Earth has been much warmer in the past, long before industrialization. And animals and plants thrived then.)
            So far, so what?

            2. “Likely the warmest”. Or maybe not. But maybe. Or maybe not.
            Plus, the Earth is millions of years old. So why stop at 1,400 years? Because it serves the agenda. Stating that truth that the Earth was warmer before then hurts the cause.

            3. “The evidence for human influence has grown.” So what? Does that mean we can stop the NATURAL warming? No. The evidence is growing that man’s influence for good or bad is LESS significant than thought in the past.

            Elsewhere in your IPCC Report, the statement is made that our ability to stop climate change by changing man’s activity appears to be less than thought before. (Don’t bother looking that one up – I expect you to Deny it anyway.)

            The evidence for human influence . . . does not mean we can stop natural warming. It just means we have some influence, maybe a little, maybe a lot.

            4 . “Surface temperature is projected to rise over the 21st century under all assessed emission.” CORRECT! Including Zero emission scenarios. (HA HA HA HA. Too funny.)

            5. “Anthropogenic green house gas emissions have increased since . . . are extremly likely to have been the dominant cause of . . . the warming . . .” Translation: maybe 20 %. Maybe 60%. “likely” and “dominant” aren’t the same as certainly and a majority. They are terrific weasel words that are NOT scientific in any way. They are a very loose opinion, one with a lot of wiggle room.

            And then you go on to blah blah blah your opinions, which are not supported by your citations.

            And no where do you even try to answer my questions above, like how high the oceans will rise, how many will die, when it will happen. Or what we can even do about it. Solar and Wind? What a joke for serious readers of the science. Even Germany is giving up on their Energiwende as pointless and expensive do-goodism.

            Because no one knows. “settled science” Sure.

            ZZZZZZZ.

          • May 24, 2018 at 4:12 pm
            Craig Cornell says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 0
            Thumb down 4

            Your links:

            1. mit: they are studying a changing climate. Says nothing about why it is changing. Says nothing about man at all. (ie. why did you even bother? We all know the climate is chaning. ZZZZ)
            2. One person disagrees with Trump’s decision on Paris, and CNN is going to quote him! You found ONE PERSON! Oh my God.

            Got me good. Man, you are one tough thinker.

          • May 24, 2018 at 4:45 pm
            confused says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 1
            Thumb down 0

            “And no where do you even try to answer my questions above”

            sir – someone’s argument does not become invalid if they choose not to answer your absurd questions. putting a number to “how much will the seas rise?” or “how many people will die” doesn’t prove or disprove man’s contribution to the changing climate. i shall leave the rest of the reply to cut the bias should he or she choose to continue the discussion with you

          • May 25, 2018 at 12:29 am
            Cut the Bias says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 2
            Thumb down 0

            No, confused, I won’t waste my time.

            He literally did a point-by-point takedown (attempt) of one of the sources that he himself referenced. LOL!

  • May 24, 2018 at 9:09 am
    Captain Planet says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 3
    Thumb down 0

    Craig wrote, “Now say something stupid. It is what Climate Zealots do in place of using facts. . .”

    MAY 23, 2018 AT 11:41 AM
    Craig Cornell says:
    LIKE OR DISLIKE:
    0
    0
    Boring. Nothing but Insults. No insights whatsoever. Just Boring.
    You must not be very smart. Sorry. (Have you heard of MIT?)



Add a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*