This is quite something. Darn those Canucks. As we saw with his defense of eco-vandals in England, I wonder if Dr. James Hansen will rush to The Hague to testify for this one? And if by some furthest stretch of the imagination, this lawsuit is successful, what then? Will Pachauri use the spoils to whittle down the number of lifetimes if will take to erase his own carbon footprint? I wonder if Danny Bloom is related to omnipresent blog commenter, and Sierra Club representative, Steve Bloom? BTW Steve, we are still waiting, over a year now for your answer.
NOTE: The article below is reposted in entirety from the blog Northward Ho(t) The opinions are those of the author of that blog, Mitchel Anderson, not of myself nor of any WUWT contributor. – Anthony
Ballsy.
That is perhaps best word to describe a class action lawsuit filed this week in the International Criminal Court in The Hague in Holland against national governments refusing to act on reducing carbon emissions.
The suit was filed by climate activist Danny Bloom who is asking for “US$1 billion dollars in damages on behalf of future generations of human beings on Earth – if there are any”
No Joke
The lawsuit is specifically seeking damages from “all world leaders for intent to commit manslaughter against future generations of human beings by allowing murderous amounts of fossil fuels to be harvested, burned and sent into the atmosphere as CO2, causing possible apocalyptic harm to the Earth’s ecosystem and the very future of the human species.
The point of the suit of course is not to wring money out of carbon emitters, but to embarrass the legions of laggard governments in advance of upcoming international climate negotiations next month in Poland. According to Bloom, the legal action “is about trying to protect future generations of mankind, humankind, and a positive judgment in this case will help prod more people to take the issues of climate change and global warming more seriously. We fully intend to make all world leaders of today responsible for their actions in the present day and age.”
This case is a legal long shot no doubt, but Bloom’s team said “”it’s up to the court to decide whether this case has any merit. We fully expect the court to agree to at least hear the case and make a responsible and measured decision later.”
It would also be the first case of its kind to seek to act on behalf of future generations for the irresponsibility of their ancestors. The need to put world leaders on the hot seat is very real. International climate talks like the one happening next month in Poland have happening for over a decade yet global emissions just keep climbing. A recent report showed that in spite of international commitments, carbon emissions of 40 industrialized countries rose by 2.3 percent between 2000 and 2006.
That said, those countries that signed Kyoto saw their overall emissions fall by 17% below 1990. The disgraceful outlier among those nations is Canada, whose emissions ballooned by over 20% in spite of having ratifying Kyoto. Canada’s Prime Minister Harper has called Kyoto a “mistake” and he seems openly contemptuous of such international efforts to reduce greenhouse gases. Mr. Harper is of course not alone in the responsibility for Canada’ terrible climate change record. The Canadian public recently handed him another mandate in a general election.
Back to Mr. Bloom. His lawsuit seems directly targeted towards such irresponsible nations like Canada that have refused to take this issue seriously. If he wins, Bloom is planning to donate the $1 billion in damages to the Nobel winning Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).
Godspeed Mr. Bloom.
This is very funny. lol and just a little true.
http://www.eyeblast.tv/public/video.aspx?v=e46UZukUSU
enjoy and lighten up a bit.
Mr. Bloom,
So now I am a ‘false skeptic’?
That might be more credible and less transparently shallow and rude, if you would bother to respond to the legitimate issues raised by skeptics here.
Instead, it would appear your odd characteriztion is really just a transference by you.
Hunter (20:39:50)
I agree with you response!
#9 – If the Fifth Assessment is anything like the fourth Assessment, it will be full of assumptions and estimates. Most of the IPCC information has been recycled. All temperature and CO2 studies have disproved AGW.
Danny
If temperatures are not cyclical, why don’t we have warmer climates? All new statistics have indicated a cooling period.
Danny
Your number 6 – Europe heatwave, 2003 – offset by WUWT Post
“UK brought to a standstill as five inches of snow falls in an hour.” This the lowest temperature for this area. Europe is having a cold winter due to the Arctic Oscillation air current moving down from Norway and Sweden.
Canada is having an early freeze due to the extra cold Arctic Oscillation.
David Ball: Your Dad is one of the nicest people I have ever met.
Cheers
Pete (18:57:10) :
Recent studies of the solar forcing, changes in cosmic radiation and its role in cloud formations explain the global warming that has taken place since 1910.”
This is simply not true. Combatting bad science with worse science is not the thing to do. We do not need to invoke the Sun, there is enough natural variability in the system as it is.
Danny Bloom (00:24:35) :
Why post someone elses words, without caveat, unless you agree with them?
Opinion officially revised back down…
The false bonhomie, hearty, “were all friends here, we’re all on the same side” is just plain garbage.
Reminds me of a Crocodile suggesting to a Monkey that the “the river waters just fine, all we want to do is play”
Only a foolish monkey would listen to a crocodile.
I’m done talking to Mr Bloom – it’s a waste of time.
Jerry Alexander,
Thanks.
Notice that the AGW believers cannot answer the specific rebuttals. They always fall back on authoritarian and demeaning strategies.
Earleir this year, when the AGW industry was telling how this year we would see the Arctic go ‘ice free’, but were wrong, they never questioned the underlying assumptions as to why they made the assertion, or wondered why- out lous at least- why they were wrong. They simply moved over to yet another false assertion, usually a recycled one at that.
And the oddest part, to me is this: If I was concerned that evidence I was beleiving was indicating the end of the world was near, and I found out I might be wrong, I would be happy.
On the other hand, the AGW believer, in the face of clue after clue that their fear is misplaced, refuses to see that as good news.
@hunter (12:36:42) :
I’m forming the POV that a significant number of AGW Alarmists require an “Apocalyptic end-time”, “Catastrophic” belief to give their lives meaning.
Without such a dramatic framework, they would be lost and empty.
Hence, part of the ‘need’ and ‘desire’ for AGW to be true and the dismay when contrary evidence is presented.
Another separate factor seems to be a fascination with disaster. The bigger the disaster, the more fascinating it is. AGW as entertainment.
Without AGW – life is ‘boring’. Hence some of the dismay seems to be the sort that comes when a small boy is separted from a favourite toy.
All of this speaks to a pervasive lack of emotional maturity and awareness of, and empathy for other people.
As further evidence to the last, there never seems to be a real concern, – leading to specific concrete actions – on the part of the AGW Movement to encompass the needs of people, in the here and now.
There ‘concern’ is all about ‘saving people, habitats, etc, in the future’ – which can’t be tested. I.e was anyone hurt in the future? was anyone saved?
It’s all very convenient.
Some more lunacy.
This article is about which WWII, Pearl Harbor like events regarding our climate should happen in order to promote their green AGW agenda.
It makes us cristal clear with what kind of people we have to deal with.
Do not try to leave a response on their site because you will be blocked out.
(Unless you agree with them).
My response would have been as followed:
If it is your objective to kick humanity back into the stone age, why don’t you ask for a new ice age?
Here is the story:
What are the near-term climate Pearl Harbors?
http://climateprogress.org/2008/11/24/what-are-the-near-term-climate-pearl-harbors/
Andy Revkin saw my post on Hansen Sunday night and e-mailed me some questions and then turned my reply into a post at Dot Earth, “Joe Romm on Hansen’s Mistakes, Cap’s Limits.”
To Revkin’s question of what might drive action strong enough to avoid the worst, I cited my post on “The harsh lessons of the financial bailout” — in particular a key driver is “bad things must be happening to regular people right now.” One of the media’s greatest failings is ‘underinforming’ people that “Bad things are happening to real people right now thanks in part to human-caused climate change — droughts, wildfires, flooding, extreme weather, and on and on.” I listed a perfect recent example: “my article criticizing the NYT on the bark beetle story“.
Building on what I wrote about Hansen:
We will need a WWII-style approach, but that can only happen after we get the global warming Pearl Harbor or, more likely, multiple Pearl Harbors.
Revkin then asked “What kind of wake-up call does Mr. Romm think is conceivable on a time scale relevant to near-term policy?”
My quick response is below — but I am certainly interested in your thoughts on what kind of climatic mini-catastrophes might move public and policymaker opinion over the next decade. Preferably these “mini-catastrophes” would not themselves be evidence that we had waited too long and passed the point of no return.
Here is my list — I await yours:
Mutliple Pearl Harbors over the next decade — half or more of these happening:
1. Arctic goes ice free before 2020. It would be a big, visible global shock.
2. Rapid warming over next decade, as recent Nature and Science article suggests is quite possible (posts here and here)
3. Continued (unexpected) surge in methane
4. A megadrought hitting the SW comparable to what has hit southern Australia.
5. More superstorms, like Katrina
6. A heatwave as bad as Europe’s 2003 one.
7. Something unpredicted but clearly linked to climate, like the bark beetle devastation.
8. Accelerated mass loss in Greenland and/or Antarctica, perhaps with another huge ice shelf breaking off, but in any case coupled with another measurable rise in the rate of sea level rise.
9. The Fifth Assessment Report (2012-2013) really spelling out what we face with no punches pulled.
I say multiple events because we need a critical mass understanding the climate is changing catastrophically. Multiple events will be needed to make the case that this is global and climate-related, as opposed to local and weather-related.
For me and others, one Hurricane Katrina was enough to motivate more action, but the superstorm’s devastation could not and cannot be directly linked to climate change. It was clear evidence of what kind of catastrophes we will face in a world of superstorms and rising seas — and it is now painfully clear that future Katrinas will be worse (see “Nature: Hurricanes ARE getting fiercer — and it’s going to get much worse” and “Why future Katrinas and Gustavs will be MUCH worse, Part 2“).
And yes, for a large fraction of the population, no evidence will prove persuasive (see “The Deniers are winning, but only with the GOP“). We will have to save them in spite of their willful and self-destructive ignorance, assuming they don’t stop us.
“The science is beyond dispute… Delay is no longer an option. Denial is no longer an acceptable response.”
@Ron de Haan (15:46:33) :
I read the link to climateprogress.org – best described as “people in love with fear”.
A lot of the posters seem to be expecting irreversible catastrophy within the next 5 years or so.
Fear is contagious.
David Ball (06:48:13) : wrote, above:
” I am m afraid you cannot deny what you and your ilk have done to my father, and by extension, myself and my family. For me, it is personal. ”
David, I don’t know who you are, and I don’t who your father is, and I have no connection to DeSmog Blog, so I cannot really reply to this. But as someone above said, your Dad is a very nice guy and I am sure he is. I have no knowledge of what you are talking about. I am not connected to DeSmog. I am not part of any ilk. But I can see from your comment that someone has hurt you, and you have my sympathy on this. Really.
— Danny
Mr. Bloom, to fill the readers in on my father’s credentials ( for I believe you know very well), here it is. He has a Doctor of Science (climatology) from Queen Mary College of London. The thesis was based on the climate records from the Hudson’s Bay archive dating from 1605 to 1951. The thesis itself focused on only about 100 years of the data, but the record is approximately 350 years long. Countless late nights for years to document all 350 years worth. This is sub-arctic and would seem to me to be relevant to the debate. Just to give you an idea of what science was being done by Hudson’s Bay at the time, Captain James Cook, the explorers Mason/Dixon, and the men at Fort York were involved in a global experiment to map the transit of Venus, in the 1790’s. Most people don’t know what the transit of Venus is. As many on this blog will concur, weather itself can be fascinating. Canada was founded mainly on the fur trade, which was being driven by cold temperatures in Europe at the time, LIA. It is very sad that one has to close ones eyes to so much cool information, in order to believe what you are trying to sell us. I am not buying. You have mentioned the desmogblog ( I noticed you even put the capitols in the right locations) so I know damn well that you know who Dr. Tim Ball is. Nice try. Keep your pious platitudes and move on. My father is a nice guy (thank you Mike from Canmore), and one of the most honorable and knowledgeable men alive. I can see why you and your ilk would want to silence his voice. If he was given just an hour of MSM time, you would find yourself looking for a new line of work. Perhaps you can stop the scourge of “continental drift”. I hear it is dislocating billions of people as we speak. P.S Did you know the Suzuki Foundation has people on staff whose sole job is to discredit my father in the media? But then you already knew that , too, didn’t you?
Graeme Rodaughan (17:29:36) Fear is contagious.
If that line alone were all you had ever written, Graeme, you would win both my admiration and respect… and if it chances not to be your own original, then you have my thanks for bringing it to my notice. The fit, here, is seamless.
David Ball (20:19:56) :: My view is that for you to defend your father in this thread to this fairytale named Danny is demeaning. Your father stands head and shoulders above this dilettante, who should not be seriously addressed at any level.
Hi Roger C,
Thanks very much for the kind praise. I doubt that “Fear is contagious” is in fact original – I thought that it was a well known concept.
Cheers G
Graeme Rodaughan (21:56:37) :: May I drop back a pace here, Graeme? When I first read your Fear is contagious line my mind was a’seethe with several conflicting emotions relating to AGW (tin) trumpets and your words leapt out at me with a freshness and, I realize now, and added dimensions which are not actually spelled out there.
Yes; I have heard the phrase before, but my mindset of that moment gave them an additional clarity. I still owe you, and add that, had it been two lines, it could have been said that I was reading between them…
Roger and Graeme, with any luck this fever of AGW will give us antibodies to the next ‘madness of crowds’.
==============================
kim (23:32:32) : : Wal… I’ll hope, too; but we have already done Piltdown Man and O for a Hole to mention just two of many without developing any immunity.
I worry that we just like being scared stupid, or given a banner to march beneath, too much to quit.
I do not think we are inherantly stupid… just bored (when the livin’ is easy).
Now a sharp cold spell…
To David Ball, above:
Again, David, please hear me: you have my sympathies for whatever mischief some people might have sent your way, but please understand me, I had never heard of your father or his work before — I am not well read in the literature — and I have no connection to DeSmogBlog other than that I know how to CAP it initials. I am literate, yes, sort of, but I am not well read. So please understand, David, I never heard of you or your father before. I would like now to read his research and see what this is all about. Again, I am not a member of any ilk. I don’t understand the venom here. I don’t have any toward anyone. Like I have said from the beginning, I have an open mind and I like all people. I am not left or right, blue state or red state. I live on a small island in the western Pacific and have not set foot in the Western world for since 1991, and even then I was in Alaska for 12 years, and that is hardly the Western world either.
Again, David, you have my sympathies. Really..
That said, a blogger in California today writes a post titled
“Hansen Faces Hatred and Death Threats”
and he says:
“I interviewed author Mark Bowen a year ago about James Hansen, the world-famous climatologist, with whom Bowen wrote the book Censoring Science. Somehow the discussion went to the intensity of reaction against Hansen from those who refuse to accept the reality of global warming.
Bowen mentioned that Hansen had gotten some death threats. He said Hansen considered the threats too flaky to be very worrying.
I didn’t pursue the topic far,, but today I was reminded of Bowen’s remark by a long thread of web comments notable for the disgust and hatred directed against Hansen…
Climate activist …Danny Bloom has, according to the popular site Watts Up With That, filed a suit against national governments seeking $1 billion in damages from “all world leaders for intent to commit manslaughter against future generations of human beings.”
Filing such a suit was a misguided idea on Bloom’s part, in my view, for the same reason that pursuing impeachment against Bush and Cheney would have been a misguided strategy for Democrats to pursue.
Better to elect Barack Obama president. And better to back ways and means of conserving energy and increasing societal resilience, to protect us against the harms of global warming — and other threats.
Nonetheless, the rawness and the viciousness of the hatred on the WattsUpWithThat thread can be quite shocking. Particularly since Hansen has absolutely nothing to do with this lawsuit Bloom has been talking up.
One has to wonder if this deeply thoughtful, thoroughly decent man, Dr Hansen, really is at risk and should take precautions, in the same way that others in the public sphere have to guard against fanatics.
Here’s an example from the thread:
Someone with userid Brooklyn Red Leg (03:16:48) : said
“If I believed in Divine Retribution, I would think Dr. Hansen’s plane would go down in a remote, frosty part of the world and his supporters on the trip would be forced to eat him to stay alive. Same with the other Blood Sucking Vampires and assorted Vultures that prey on us.”
Troubling, [says the blogger in his final word]. See LINK below
LINK:
http://www.achangeinthewind.com/2008/11/death-threats-against-james-hansen.html
Graeme Rodaughan,
I have said for years, including a radio interview with the BBC, that AGW is a social movement, not a climate science.
I believe there is a pattern in societies and cultures that demands a apocalyptic resolution of internal stresses.
The lucky thing with Christianity is that the apocalypse is generally so nebulous and subject to reinterpretation that little damage has been done in recent history.
AGW, which I call Apocalyptic Global Warming, is not amenable to reinterpretation.
The skeptics are not real skeptics- they are deniers or ‘psuedo-skeptics’.
They deserve to be punished for their lack of faith, according to the AGW leadership.
AGW at its heart is a very dark and anti-human movement. We are right to resist it.
Danny, the venom is at least partly because self-admitted but earnest ignoramusus like you are stampeding the herd into self-destruction. The paradigm that CO2=AGW is simply wrong and damaging and dangerous policies that depend upon it are still being rushed into force. People, many people, are being hurt by this ‘madness of the crowd’, and those of us who don’t want to be trampled by you and your kind object. Also, despite your passivity here, I’ve heard plenty of like venom from you and yours on DotEarth. They are still maundering on over there; Revkin could use a 2X4 upside the head; reason and facts don’t seem to be impacting him.
Frankly, the coming cooling and the coming economic dislocation are going to generate a re-examination of your precious paradigm. It’s too bad that truth can’t be demonstrated except by hard times.
===============================================
Heh, I should have said ‘you and your kine’.
===========================
Danny Bloom (05:25:50) :
Interesting site you link to.
Here’s how politicians are treated there.
Hansen’s problem is that he has chosen to enter the political realm. He’s done more than just grant a few media interviews and appear on a few talk shows. He’s become a political activist, voluntarily flying to Europe to defend vandalism and openly supporting one political party over the other. It’s a little too late to start saying “oh poor little scientist me, look at all the mean things people are saying about me”.
This is not to defend such behavior, but you might as well go to all the politcial blogs and whine about how your favorite politcian is being treated.
BTW, how’s that Reuters expose coming?
It’s been several days since your self-promoting PR release, and in fact, that’s the only hit I get when I search “Danny Bloom” in Google News.
Even more curious:
Did you write your own press release under a different by-line and did you wish yourself “godspeed”?
John M. (06:44:47)
James Hansen is going to one of the great hubritic figures of our era. People forget that the road to Heaven is also paved with good intentions, and I truly believe that Hansen started out with good intentions. I believe he still has good intentions. Unfortunately, the path of honest science diverted from his, and he’s been leading us all to Hell, lately.
===========================================
Just in the spirit of completeness:
Danny Bloom – SourceWatch