JoNova

A science presenter, writer, speaker & former TV host; author of The Skeptic's Handbook (over 200,000 copies distributed & available in 15 languages).


Handbooks

The Skeptics Handbook

Think it has been debunked? See here.

The Skeptics Handbook II

Climate Money Paper


Advertising

micropace


GoldNerds

The nerds have the numbers on precious metals investments on the ASX



Archives

Children win Climate Change legal case: lose future economy

Children Win Another Climate Change Legal Case In Mass Supreme Court

[Forbes] This case is one of several similar cases in federal district courts in Oregon and Washington, and in the state courts of North Carolina, New Mexico, Pennsylvania and Colorado. All of these legal cases are supported by Our Children’s Trust, that seeks the legal right of our youth to a healthy atmosphere and stable climate in the future.

How about the legal right of our youth to live in a sustainable civilization? What if a stable climate costs more than a stable economy can afford?

Other parents might hope their children have the right to inherit a stable currency, and a government without trillions in debt.

Championed by Professor Mary Christina Wood in the Law School at the University of Oregon under the idea of Atmospheric Trust Litigation, these lawsuits claim that a government elected by the people and for the people has a duty to protect the natural systems required for the people’s survival.

So if the government is elected by the people to make these kinds of decisions, why is a court deciding public policy? The children of Massachusetts are free to set up a political party to slow storms and keep the temperatures stable, no matter what the cost. (They’re called The Greens).

VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
Rating: 9.4/10 (73 votes cast)
Children win Climate Change legal case: lose future economy, 9.4 out of 10 based on 73 ratings

Tiny Url for this post: http://tinyurl.com/jgrh6rj

110 comments to Children win Climate Change legal case: lose future economy

  • #

    Such stupidity. It’s incredible how far reaching the effects of science broken by politics can get.

    371

    • #
      Peter Miller

      Just a stupid prank by a small bunch of sad, pointless people, desperate to demonstrate there is some point to their pathetic lives.

      As sceptics, we threaten to discredit ourselves by taking any notice of these kinds of gimmicks.

      151

      • #
        OriginalSteve

        Youve missed an important point – precedent.

        The legals system thrives on precedent….this is the dumbest case ever, but its the sledge hammer to allow every bleeding heart and western civilisation-hating Leftie the ability to demolish our economy based on the Big Lie.

        As always “think of the children” is the cover used by cowards to attack Godly righteousness.

        241

        • #
          ianl8888

          Yes

          Cassandra said years ago tha the legal/court system is as untrustworthy as the Greens themselves. And we cannot vote magistrates/judges out of office.

          150

          • #
            Dennis

            No, but politicians appoint the judiciary and party political appointees are in the majority.

            A QC who wanted to secure a position as a judge in a state jurisdiction once told me that he had no hope of being appointed because there was a Labor Government in office and he did not have any influence with that side of politics.

            190

            • #
              Geoffrey Williams

              Perhaps the judiciary should be elected every 3 years-similar to the senate.
              Someone tell me it’s a stupid idea . . .
              Geoff W

              80

              • #
                Ted O'Brien.

                Make it 5 years.

                40

              • #

                not entirely stupid but you want to limit it. If it was every court you’d soon run out of qualified and capable people

                40

              • #
                Robk

                The judiciary must act on what is law. In this case they were bound by the”Global Warming Solutions Act” of Massachusetts. It is the law makers(politicians) and voters who facilitated the action by making it law.

                80

              • #
                Ted O'Brien.

                GI. If the bloke that is in is the only bloke able, everybody is in trouble.

                20

              • #
                Dennis

                There are members who are honourable people and as, for example, a QC they can make far more money than they would receive as a judge. Fortunately, blatant political appointees aside, the decent ones view public service as a privilege and repayment for their education and rewards from their profession.

                30

        • #
          Dennis

          Remember that UN executive Christiana Figueres told a media conference in Paris just before the Paris Conference that the agenda is about collapsing capitalism, not environmentalism.

          200

          • #
            OriginalSteve

            Yep, and one day we will have a “Climate Nuremberg” trial..count on it….

            All Collaborators will dealt with due process according to the Law.

            90

          • #
            clive

            And you know,what is even stranger?Nobody is doing anything about it.

            00

      • #
        Robk

        Unfortunately, in this case it is the law of that state. They cannot ignore it.

        50

    • #
      Rereke Whakaaro

      … these lawsuits claim that a government … has a duty to protect the natural systems required for the people’s survival.

      That sounds reasonable.

      So the complainant only has to show that the government has failed to protect the natural system. But to do that, they have to a) define what the natural system is, and b) find a point in time when the system was in that natural state, and c) demonstrate that any deviation from that natural state was caused or aided by actions of the government, and by no other cause or causes.

      That should be easy.

      Mind you, it will drag the whole climate science fiasco through the courts as well, and records and methodologies will need to be presented in evidence, and opened to full public scrutiny. After all, justice must be seen to be done.

      Hey, I am allowed to dream, aren’t I?

      70

      • #
        M Conroy

        The natural state of most places, before people changed it, was NO PEOPLE. No houses, no teepees, no camps. No streets. Only animals and animal tracks. So, the only way to preserve a natural system is remove ourselves from the system. Or live naked in the woods, sleeping on the ground, eating bugs. (And not too many bugs at that.) Which won’t work so well in Massachusetts, or Washington, or Oregon.

        50

    • #
      MareeS

      Children must win. Can I put ours at the head of the queue?

      10

  • #
  • #
    Robk

    The court can only rule on what is law. The carbon reduction targets must have been law in that state.(and others)
    A message to law makers and voters.

    70

  • #
    Yonniestone

    In the same way they should campaign for the future right to exist in,

    - George Orwell’s 1984.
    - The hunger games Panem.
    - East Germany 1949 to 1990.
    - Tasmania 2016 (sorry couldn’t resist)

    110

    • #
      James Murphy

      You forgot to add South Australia from 2016 onwards.

      BYO generator and literacy/numeracy scheme.

      120

      • #
        Graeme No.3

        JM:

        All is well! According to some barely heard election news (I only listen until I can find the remote control) both Malcolm “banker” Turnbull and Billy “goat” Shorten are willing to provide federal funds towards the building of a 110MW solar tower station at Pt. Augusta, but there is a slight impediment.
        Guess the impediment?
        1. Is it because it will cost 900million not the claimed 561million?
        2. Is it because it will only produce 33MW (maximum) over 24 hours (not the misleading 110)?
        3. Is it because you could get the same output for a fraction of the cost?
        4. Is it because it will need to burn gas every morning to start before dawn?
        5. Is it because it will be useless over the 3 months of winter?
        6. Is it because the electricity will cost $275 per MWh versus coal fired at $30?

        Nope, all wrong. It is because (bankrupt) S.A. will have to put up the rest. Who said politicians slice bread with corkscrews?

        190

      • #
        StefanL

        The plan is to increase the capacity of the Heywood inter-connector, bringing in more electricity produced from Victoria’s brown coal !

        40

    • #

      The West really needs to be put on suicide watch.

      111

      • #
        Brad

        Karl, I would relocate to Australia bit I don’t have 15 million to qualify…

        20

      • #
        clive

        No, we just need to get rid of these”Do Nothing,Career Politicians”Vote One for anybody,except ,Labour,Liberal,or the Greens.

        00

  • #

    The Forbes site linked to above says “Please turn off your browser’s ad blocker to continue to the site…”. To me, this is like saying, “you must relinquish all of your defenses to be allowed in here”. Needless to say, I add Forbes to Huffington Post on the list of sites that I won’t even bother with.

    And these people think it is the “other guys” that are the hopeless troglodytes.

    Too many pots, too many kettles. Again, I predict open war before it’s over.

    140

    • #
      OriginalSteve

      Unfortunately I think you are right…I have often said I suspect ther will eventually be ( literally ) blood in the streets over this…..

      I always think about what happened to the Romanovs to keep persepctive.

      60

      • #
        clive

        Did you know that gun permits are 2.5 million in the USA this year,so far?I f Trump gets in,there are going to be some “Very Scared Climateers”over there.In fact I think if the “People”don’t get their way and either Sanders or the Hilderbeast get in,there will be a blood bath in the streets.There is a reason that the USA are allowed to have fire arms and that is to protect them from the Politicians and that is why Obama has been trying to take their fire arms away.

        70

  • #
    TdeF

    So with thousands of nuclear missiles in the world, courts are making the world a safer place by attempting to reduce local CO2 levels an infinitesmally small amount, maybe?

    In a world with seven billion people, surely food and fresh water and shelter would have been the first priority for sustainability, but apparently it is CO2 levels, something which we cannot control at all?
    They may as well legislate for peace and harmony.

    WW2 clearly could have been stopped by the rulings of a few Federal District courts in the US? Self indulgent nonsense as local judges rule on matters which are not only beyond their capability to affect but far beyond their comprehension. They might as well rule on the moon landings and the descent of man and the right of North Korea to develop the Hydrogen bomb, if they are not too busy ruling on CO2.

    To be far they are no less effective than the UN which considers world CO2 levels more important than the conflict in Syria or nuclear proliferation. Even Robert Mugabe turned up illegally in Paris for the really important COP21 conference on handing out other people’s money, sustainably.

    200

  • #
    James Murphy

    I’ve often wondered if it would be possible to take legal action against a government which actively promoted the uptake of diesel engines in preference over petrol or LPG, given the potential for negative health effects from diesel exhaust particulates (e.g., Parisian pollution).

    At least that would be a legitimate environmental concern.

    120

    • #
      OriginalSteve

      Heres the thing –

      - *If* CAGW was real, the gummint would do soemthing drastic to stop it killingthe planet

      - *If* CAGW was real, they would force holders of hydrogen patents to hand them over and use them

      - *if* CAGW was real, everyone would get behind it

      - *If* CAGW was real, sceptics wouldnt exist.

      QED

      101

      • #
        Robk

        I understand what you are trying to say Steve, unfortunately the implication of “if it were real, there would be no sceptics”is…because there are sceptics, it is not real. Unfortunately these are circular arguments that don’t carry much weight in a robust debate. It is better to highlight the cronyism, ulterior agendas, political motives and flawed science and reasoning.

        80

        • #
          OriginalSteve

          AGreed, adn as I was syaing to a work colleague today, we need to teach our kids to do many things abhorrent to the lunatic Left:

          (1) Challenge them about the science

          (2) Never take anything on face value

          (3) Tell them “Thats wrong” if its wrong

          (4) Teach kids to understand politics and shenanigans that goes on. Teach them about propaganda and how it works, teach them how to reason from logic, teach them tha if they pursue a path of truth, that they may well be harassed and hated…

          We are in a “war” of sorts ( the non-shooting variety ) , and its going to get much uglier than it is now….

          70

          • #
            Russ Wood

            I would LOVE to – but my son, who (I hope) is as intelligent as his mom and dad, thinks that the whole anti-global warming stuff is a falsity of the Republicans. And WE live in South Africa! I’m afraid that his only ‘data’ exposure is to the MSM – and the majority of that is American or BBC television. He would rather believe what hee sees on the goggle box than assume that his parents actually have a good idea of what we’re talking about. So, I would expect a SERIOUS uphill battle to make one’s kids understand that OTHER people have other ideas, and not to discard concepts because they come from ‘demonised’ (MSM again!) sources.

            50

    • #
      Analitik

      Legitimate if the diesel particulate issue wasn’t based around a faked study by a CARB employee with a mail order PhD

      http://reason.com/blog/2012/06/14/ucla-professor-sues-for-firing-over-dies
      http://www.wsj.com/articles/californias-diesel-rule-scam-1445212223

      50

      • #
        James Murphy

        Obviously the hard part is proving that the particulates can be held responsible for any health problems, though I can’t imagine it’s altogether too good for anyone, given that the air has a distinct taste to it, not to mention colour, on those few occasions every year when Paris gets seriously smogged-in. Not quite up to the air I’ve tasted and seen in Beijing, but certainly getting there…

        besides which, it is just an idle thought – there is no way on earth I would voluntarily get mixed up in the French legal system, I am not yet completely mad, or a masochist.

        50

  • #
    Manfred

    healthy atmosphere and stable climate

    Would someone please provide a link to the strict definition of both these terms? Do such definitions merely exclude anthropogenic influence, or are they extended to include natural contribution like rotting vegetation, Ocean Vents, volcanoes, bush fires?

    In passing I note that the UNFCCC (1992) provides a definition of ‘climate change’ but omits any definition of ‘stability’. I have alluded to this before. The absence of a defined goal end-point to ‘climate change’ eg. ‘no further change’ is a glaring omission nicely described by all the words one is not permitted to use on this site. Now, please don’t chime in here and claim ‘sustainable’ as the ‘end-point’!

    “Climate change” means a change of climate which is attributed directly or indirectly to human activity that alters the composition of the global atmosphere and which is in addition to natural climate variability observed over comparable time periods.”

    Note also that ‘land usage’ is not yet included in this 1992 definition, whereas, by 2000, the UN has done so:

    “Climate change may be due to natural internal processes or external forcings, or to persistent anthropogenic changes in the composition of the atmosphere or in land use.”


    Our Children’s Trust
    really needs to wake-up and realise that the UN frames the entire ‘climate problem’ in terms of anthropogenic influences.

    The wider answer I should have thought is self-evident. Ask the Greens.

    [I don't know what put this in moderation but I see nothing wrong with it. I can't help commenting though. Good luck finding those definitions.] AZ

    50

    • #
      Robk

      In this case, from the article, the court’s ruling on the DOE turned on it’s efforts too abide by it’s emmissions targets which are legislated. So other definitions don’t really matter much in the case.

      20

      • #
        OriginalSteve

        “A stable Climate” is impossible due to natural variability – its given them carte blanche to wage eternal war on humaity via legislation…..

        In years to come, people will wonder how The Great Eco Genocide started ( where those refusing the “enlightenment” of eco Lunacy were executed…) ,….but we have its genesis right here….

        50

    • #
      James Murphy

      speaking of “stable climate” – This is why I like to ask ‘true believers’ what “the climate” should be doing now, and what CO2 levels should be doing now, if they were to imagine that humans never started burning fossil fuels.

      I have never got an answer from any of them, except insults or attempts to change the subject. Not even a ‘the climate wouldn’t have changed’, or ‘natural variability, but not extreme change like we have now’…

      60

      • #
        el gordo

        ‘…imagine that humans never started burning fossil fuels.’

        That’s a good line, I might borrow it.

        My latest attempt, after being bombarded with “its been warm and no frost yet”, I tell them that all the CO2 molecules are jammed up in the latitude of Cape Grim and its intensifying the high pressure belt. BoM said so.

        They turn off.

        20

        • #
          M Conroy

          ‘…imagine that humans never started burning fossil fuels.’

          Hmm. We’d have no whales, for one, as we were burning whale oil. And there’d be no forests, either, as we’d have burnt them up too. Dung is burnable, and I’m sure with all the grasslands left after the deforestation we’d have cows aplenty to provide -that- fuel. There’d be no steel, nothing that requires high heat to manufacture. No synthetics. No modern medicine – including dentistry. Sewage wouldn’t be pumped away, water wouldn’t be pumped in. No TV, internet, maybe no books. No cars. No annual trips to the islands for winter break. No HVAC. Lots of odors from offal, urine, tanning, assorted “natural” chemicals and decompositions. Some whiffy and deadly gases, too.

          No lots of stuff – but we’d have clean air to breathe during our short, brutal lives. Maybe. There’d probably be lots of things we have gotten rid of though – plagues of various sorts, leprosy, stillbirths, cholera, dysentery, measles, smallpox – and various parasites, intestinal and otherwise.

          I really prefer the world with fossil fuels than what we actually had before them.

          10

    • #
      Manfred

      “I see nothing wrong with it.”

      Gosh. The relief is palpable.

      20

    • #
      Manfred

      The wider answer I should have thought is self-evident. Ask the Greens.

      Having labeled this period the ‘anthropocene‘, defined as

      The Anthropocene defines Earth’s most recent geologic time period as being human-influenced, or anthropogenic, based on overwhelming global evidence that atmospheric, geologic, hydrologic, biospheric and other earth system processes are now altered by humans.

      …it seems quite bizarre, but some of the more earnest Greens can’t wait to end the period. Now, if we’re being consistent, shouldn’t some of those Greens be earnestly advising their friends over at ‘Our Children’s Trust’ about the merits of birth control?

      20

  • #
    handjive

    Man fined for dud doomsday warning

    We will never be able to build enough jails to fit them all in.

    80

    • #
      OriginalSteve

      Ironically, many Americans bought guns to protect themselves against terrorism – I think the timing might have been opportune for other reasons….

      60

    • #
      Ted O'Brien.

      Don’t laugh! It’s not as funny as it should be.

      20

  • #
    Ian George

    ‘Signed into law in 2008, this Act created a framework for reducing state GHG emissions by 25% over those of 1990 by 2020 …’.

    What can Massachusetts do? Why not simply close down all coal/gas fired power stations for 3 months every year. That should do it.

    70

  • #
    Gary

    Massachusetts passed a stupid law that has proven impossible to enforce without hurting the state’s economy. This decision directs the state to enforce the law, economy be damned. So, Massachusetts will either have to change the law and save its economy, or comply with the law and court order and damage the economy. I for one am looking forward to the denouement with great anticipation. Where’s the popcorn?

    90

    • #
      OriginalSteve

      Ironically, it could be wonderfully self limiting – people will start to see another California appearing, and leave in droves, so it withers and dies economically and becomes a wasteland and a cautionary tale of Greenies in Wonderland….

      Lewis Carroll must have smoked some pretty heavy stuff to write what he did, but I think this mob must be on Eco Kool Aid….

      80

  • #
    Roy Hogue

    Well, well, well! Forbes doesn’t like my ad blocker and won’t let me continue without turning it off. I’ve bad news for Forbes — that ain’t’ gonna happen. I’ve suffered through too many ads that are very user unfriendly and if they want to drive me away, they’ve succeeded.

    40

    • #
      Roy Hogue

      Nevertheless, it seems obvious that I can quit suspecting we’re in the hands of children and be certain of it from now on. :-(

      I wonder when the Chimp phase will begin. Some extreme environmentalists’ view of the world already says animals should be able to sue in court. We shouldn’t have long to wait now.

      50

      • #
        Roy Hogue

        I suspect that Massachusetts will never wake up and simply repeal the law. That would be a much too intelligent thing to do.

        40

      • #
        OriginalSteve

        The scene from “2001 a Space Odyssey” where the chimps are leaping around the base of the ( blanatntly Masonic ) black monolith comes to mind….

        40

        • #
          Manfred

          Personally, it reminded me more of a Stonehenge monolith until that is, I thought of the uncovered slate of a snooker table. You’ll see an acknowledgment in the credits of the film to Westone Natural Stone Slate Co., Ltd. The Masons on the other hand, are conspicuous by their absence.

          10

  • #
    Roy Hogue

    The sad reality of this is that it isn’t the children doing this but a bunch of adults willing to use children as leverage to get what they want. That makes the whole thing not only foolish and misguided in the extreme but despicable into the bargain.

    The parent who will do things like this in the name of their minor child is as great a disgrace as you can find.

    90

    • #
      KinkyKeith

      Good points Roy and the problem is that these child_centric parents will gain confidence to push their children ahead of them in future wars against society and other individuals.

      And people wonder why there is so much depression about.

      Society has become so slick and sophisticated that people are unable to connect with reality.

      Kk

      70

      • #
        Roy Hogue

        Society has become so slick and sophisticated that people are unable to connect with reality.

        I’m left wondering about that. Are we really so slick and sophisticated? Or do we just think we are while we really remain the same old human species we have always been: fearful of the future, fearful of the unknown, fearful about what others think of us…[put your choice here]…desiring to be loved, liked and important but somehow never being sure we have those things and tempted to do otherwise unthinkable things to get them?

        I don’t know. But I’m leaning toward not as sophisticated as we think we are. We can build slick, sophisticated — and complicated — things today but they don’t seem to fill the hole inside. Just for one question, has the Internet made life more satisfying? All it brings into my home these days seems to be bad news. Another airplane down, possibly a bomb, doesn’t make my day any brighter.

        70

    • #
      Ted O'Brien.

      Yes, Roy. And how many of those adults have no children of their own?

      20

      • #
        Roy Hogue

        I will hazard a guess and say that the most outspoken of these advocates for the children are too young and too involved in their cause to have families.

        Just my guess. But typically it’s the young who act the worst in the name of a cause, not always, but much of the time.

        10

    • #
      Manfred

      Children have been hapless pawns in the ‘climate-change war’ since what may be the beginning of the end of The West. Whether invoked at the end of catastrophic statements in the clichéd eco-marxist Green sign-off, ‘think of the children, the grandchildren and the great grandchildren’, I thought the exploding heads in the classroom successfully plundered the depths of mindless eco-depravity. It seems not. The sick doctrine of ‘political correctness’ managed to spawn ‘Our Children’s Trust’, an obvious pun on the word ‘trust’, which merely serves to highlight that that is the last word one should consider to mean what it implies by being juxtaposed to ‘children’. When these kids come of age, as I’ve mentioned before, the unintended consequence of their eco-grooming and brainwashing may be very unpleasant for the pus coloured eco-perpetrators.

      70

      • #
        Roy Hogue

        In truth, children get used in more ways than we probably realize. I have seen good evidence that even children’s sports are sometimes a proxy for the parent’s ego trip.

        20

  • #
    john

    This Childrens Global Warming Crusade started in Paris during the Paris Climate Conference. They like to drop hints…

    This legal attempt that made news appeared on CNN at about the time of the Paris Climate Conference in France last year and is shown on the following video.

    http://www.cnn.com/2015/11/30/opinions/sutter-obama-climate-change-cop21-two-degrees/

    Also, the Cannes Film Festival was the lead in to Paris Climate Conference where Al Gore was a keynote speaker along with many of his acolytes. This should be disturbing.

    In reality, what happened back then in the name of religion is also happening today in the name of the false religion of global warming. The children have already been sold into slavery and don’t realize it yet…

    The Children’s Crusade is one of the more unusual events that occurred in Medieval England. In the year 1212, tens of thousands of self-proclaimed, unarmed crusading children set out from northern France and western Germany to regain Jerusalem from the Muslims. While never actually receiving official sanction, the so-called crusade was a disaster. None of the children reached the Holy Land, many were said to have been sold into slavery, and thousands never returned at all. – See more at: http://www.ancient-origins.net/history-important-events/childrens-crusade-thousands-children-march-holy-land-never-return-003044#sthash.a3g7txZi.dpuf

    90

  • #
    Dennis

    What about a court case on behalf of Mother Nature?

    Does she deserve to be insulted and misrepresented by lawyers with too much time on their hands?

    60

    • #
      Leonard Lane

      Dennis, lawyers also have too much money available to them or else they wouldn’t do anything.

      40

  • #
    handjive

    o/t:

    News magazine TIMES reported 1947
    Warming before Cooling- the trace to the first world war

    Too Dumb to Prevent Climate Change and WwII?
    By Arnd Bernaerts (googlebooks)

    “Norwegian and Russian scientists believe that the Gulf Stream, Europe ‘s warm-water heating system, is flowing faster and farther into the north, tempering the climate, driving back the pack ice.

    In 1909, the Spitsbergen coalfields had an annual shipping period of only 95 mid-season days.
    In 1946, the last ship got safely away on Dec. 6. (TIME, June16, 1947)

    The Times names Dr. Ahlmann as the source of information saying that he has been collecting evidence from a variety of sources: temperature records, glaciers, trees, fish, and cites him claiming that:” In the Scandinavian countries, the winters have been getting milder since the 19th Century, and that he “hopes the warm cycle will last for at least a few centuries.”

    (via comments @stevegoddard)

    50

  • #
    Geoffrey Williams

    Minority groups governments of the day using courts and threats of litigation fears etc, is not in my view a good path for society to take. If these people are genuine and wish to pursue their political agenda they should as Jo says, do so by acting through political parties. Then let the people vote.
    Regards Geoff W

    30

    • #
      Robk

      Unfortunately, in Massachusetts, the court did rule on legislation passed by a government that was voted in by the people. In that sense it was their wish, I fear they got it wrong. An interesting case example to see what damage is done.

      40

      • #
        Robk

        I should add this is a fine example of why smaller government is better than big government. If mistakes are made, others can learn from them. If bright ideas are tested to be sound, others can more safely adopt. It’s a survival thing.

        60

  • #
    Frederick Colbourne

    I wonder if these state judges are elected and more concerned about massive opposition by nation Green lobbies when they are up for re-election.

    There are two reasons I raise this question.

    First, courts would not normally allow pleas such as this by minors.

    Second, if an adult made such a plea on behalf of minors, a court would not normally hear the plea for lack of standing

    20

  • #

    “How about the legal right of our youth to live in a sustainable civilization? What if a stable climate costs more than a stable economy can afford?”

    Economic growth and CO2 emissions need not be proportional. Since 1973 U.S. real per capita GDP has grown by 99%, while per capita CO2 emissions have dropped by 27%.

    21

    • #
      yonason

      GDP is correlated with competent management of the economy, not on tiny changes in CO2 concentration in the atmosphere.

      Of course, if an administration attempts to “mitigate” the imaginary effects of CO2, that correlates well with the destruction of the economy, as can be seen from the abysmal Obama record.

      When you have an ignorant ideologue at the helm, failure is a given.

      00

  • #
  • #
    yonason

    Yet one more reason I’m glad I no longer live in that bastion of liberal nonsense.

    20

  • #

    The court system in the US and elsewhere has already demonstrated a level of incompetence sufficient to guarantee that it does not have the acumen needed to make a rational determine in highly contested scientific arenas like climate science. The US Supreme Court failed to appreciate the lack of factual relevance in EPA’s assertions that human-generated CO2 represented a clear and present danger (viz. the Endangerment Finding) allegedly putting future populations at risk from catastrophic climate change.
    HL

    [I fixed your typo. I don't know why this ended up in moderation but I see nothing wrong with it so I'm approving it.] AZ

    20

  • #
    John Robertson

    Wait a minute.
    Deliberately infecting children with Gang Green is a criminal offence.
    Not to mention a hideous way to die.
    What kind of evil would do this?
    And using the courts to force the infliction of this infection is beyond insanity.

    10

  • #
    john

    As promised, my writing peer and friend, Barbara Durkin adds a little more: (there will be a lot more in the future).

    “Thank you, John, for provoking me :)

    Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court–
    Our kids are being used to further the greed and graft agenda. A young lady I’ve known since she was a child was so fearful of Global Warming that she had trouble sleeping. Her fear was cultivated by the shameless, immoral and ignorant who convinced her that she would be taken by rising tides before morning. It’s appalling that children are being indoctrinated into a cult endorsed by Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court with the aid of AGW conflicted hypocrite and high priest Al Gore.

    The Green Communities Act was sponsored by Sal DiMasi, MA former House Speaker now serving an eight year prison term for public corruption, conspiracy and extortion,

    The Green Communities Act GCA was signed by former MA Governor Deval Patrick on July 2, 2008. From his podium Governor Patrick stated:

    “Today, Massachusetts has taken a giant step forward toward a clean energy future,” said Governor Deval Patrick, who signed the bill at a ceremony at the Museum of Science. “This legislation will reduce electric bills, promote the development of renewable energy, and stimulate the clean energy industry that is taking root here in the Commonwealth…”

    The Boston Herald headline on November 10, 2011 reveals a staggering $4 Billion dollars in extra cost to ratepayers by the Green Communities Act. Electric ratepayers anticipating Patrick’s promised savings by the GCA, are the victims of a $4 Billion bait and switch. See: Boston Herald 11/10/11 ‘Martha Coakley: ‘Green’ act costs $4B’

    The CEO of First Wind, Paul Gaynor, was Patrick’s appointed Advisor on green policy to then MA energy secretary and (ahem) renewable energy entrepreneur Ian Bowles during 2009. Gaynor was invited to write policy that favors his goods in his marketplace, (ahem).

    UPC (First Wind) CEO qualifications as Advisor to MA energy secretary Bowles on green policy?

    July 15, 2008
    The Press Republican
    “We’ve had a number of complaints from counties all over the state, from Franklin all the way over to Erie,” said John Milgrim, spokesman for Attorney General Andrew Cuomo.”
    “Franklin County District Attorney Derek Champagne was among “DAs from eight counties, public officials and citizens” who bombarded Albany with complaints about Noble and Massachusetts-based First Wind, formerly known as UPC Wind, he said”
    http://www.wind-watch.org/news/2008/07/16/noble-wind-energy-firm-under-investigation-relationship-between-companies-and-public-officials-examined/

    The very powerful Ian Bowles is also Founding Chairman of the MassCEC that skims MA ratepayers dollars to invest in political insiders’ renewable schemes.

    Bowles finally left as energy secretary and his successor at MassCEC was Alicia Barton. Bowles became Director of First Wind bought by SunEdison for $2.4 bn. Barton also left MassCEC to jump on board at SunEdison. Gaynor then lost his job at SunEdison.

    I’d like to know if Barton is still with SunEdison (SUNE). As SUNE stock plummeted 71.4% during the three months following their purchase of First Wind. And as we know, SunEdison has filed for bankruptcy protection as world’s largest renewable developer.

    The regulators during the Patrick Administration were the regulated. They wrote the renewable rules that force citizens to buy what they sell and service that the free market continues to reject, renewables.”

    00

    • #
      john

      More:

      Energy efficiency–Bowles? John? (No promises on links in my docs that frequently are disabled)

      In addition, Bowles is working with two stealth start-ups funded by Cambridge venture capital firm General Catalyst and considering launching a start-up of his own that would work in energy efficiency. “It’s an interesting time in clean energy for sure,’’ Bowles said.
      http://articles.boston.com/2011-05-06/news/29517350_1_energy-resources-energy-markets-new-energy-projects

      Ian Bowles was simultaneously serving as MA energy Czar, Founding Chairman of the MassCEC and as Advisor to FloDesign that MassCEC granted $3 million. The term was up for this $3 million in 2015. FloDesign Inc., and FlowDesign Wind Turbine Corp., are Massachusetts Foreign Corporation(s) with a name change during November of 2013 to “Ogin Inc.” based in the Netherlands.

      While Ogin Intellectual Property is listed in the “Official Gazette of the Montenegrin Intellectual Property Office’ 2014/15. http://www.ziscg.me/doc/Glasnik_15.pdf

      ENTER ENRON (again) thru the Patrick Admin-

      Flo-Design CFO Matthew Commons held several positions at Enron was then CFO of FloDesign. P.S. Matt Commons went to OGIN but has since left. That doesn’t spell success or bang for our bucks as ratepayers investing in Flo-Design, with name changed to OGIN.

      Matthew Commons
      CFO, FloDesign Wind Turbine Corp
      Wind Power Panelist
      Matthew Commons is Chief Financial Officer for FloDesign Wind Turbine Corp., which manufactures high efficiency utility-scale shrouded wind turbines. He is responsible for financial management, business development and strategic planning. He has worked with renewable technologies since 2001 in positions at Enron, American Electric Power, LS Power Equity Advisors and The NorthBridge Group. His experience includes development, financing, and power sales agreements for over 500 MW of wind resources.
      http://greenovationconference.com/conference-info/speaker_bios.cfm

      Patrick admin pitch on renewables– I don’t understand how the MA SEC of ENERGY (former) can get away with granting money by MassCEC as Chairman of MassCEC to companies with which he’s involved, like Flo-Design, now OGIN–

      “As our Administration continues to position the Commonwealth for long-term economic growth, we have pulled together attractive resources and tools to offer innovative companies, who are committed to expanding their clean energy business in Massachusetts,” said Lieutenant Governor Timothy Murray. “We want to see these companies succeed and grow here, and our strategic investments are helping companies like FloDesign accomplish these goals.”

      To help facilitate this expansion, the Massachusetts Clean Energy Center (MassCEC) has approved a $3 million financing package for FloDesign. The package includes a five-year $700,000 forgivable loan, contingent on the company maintaining its corporate headquarters and primary R&D facility in Massachusetts, creating or retaining 150 jobs in the next three years and maintaining those jobs for an additional two years. In addition, the package includes a $600,000 convertible grant, which gives MassCEC an equity stake in FloDesign should the company receive additional financing, and $1.7 million from MassCEC’s Renewable Energy Trust to defray a portion of the cost of installing the company’s first “shrouded” wind turbines at state or local public entities and non-profit organizations.
      http://www.outlookseries.com/N6/Financial2698_Ian_Bowles_MassCEC_FloDesign_Wind_Turbine_Wins_$3M_Financing_Package_Massachusetts_Clean_Energy_Center.htm

      [Bowles] He is also serving as an adviser for Harvest Power, a Waltham company that produces biogas, fertilizers, and soil products from food and yard waste, and FloDesign Wind Turbine Corp. of Waltham, which is developing a new kind of wind turbine. Last year, the state gave FloDesign $3 million in grants and loans in exchange for a promise to remain in Massachusetts and gradually create additional jobs. Bowles said he will not be involved in FloDesign’s work that was funded with state money. Harvest Power, meanwhile, raised nearly $52 million in venture capital in March.

      00

  • #
    yonason

    Oh yes, and if those are the children we’re “saving” the future for, I honestly don’t see the advantage.

    10