Climate Craziness of the Week: James Hansen is using children to sue US government over climate

keep-calm-hansen-childrenSo the question is,  just how low will activists stoop?  We predict that eventually Gina McCarthy will say “we are compelled by law to take stronger action”, just as Lisa Jackson did with Massachusetts vs EPA.

From RTCC:

This week a group of young Americans aged 8-19 filed a lawsuit against the US Federal Government to demand greater action on climate change.

The 21 young plaintiffs sought an order from the District Court of Oregon, requiring Obama to implement a national plan for the reduction of atmospheric concentrations of CO2 to 350 ppm by the year 2100.

This is in line with the international target to keep warming below 2 degrees on pre-industrial levels.

The Complaint, submitted on Wednesday to to coincide with International Youth Day, further accuses Obama and the Federal Government of knowingly risking “harm to human life, liberty and property” through intensive fossil fuel use.





Plaintiffs include amongst the many and their guardians:

SOPHIE K., through her Guardian Dr. James Hansen;

EARTH GUARDIANS, a nonprofit organization; and FUTURE GENERATIONS, through their Guardian Dr. James Hansen




BARACK OBAMA, in his official capacity as President of the United States;


CHRISTY GOLDFUSS, in her official capacity as Director of Council on Environmental Quality;

SHAUN DONOVAN, in his official capacity as Director of the Office of Management and Budget;

DR. JOHN HOLDREN, in his official capacity as Director of the Office of Science and Technology Policy;


DR. ERNEST MONIZ, in his official capacity as Secretary of Energy;


SALLY JEWELL, in her official capacity as Secretary of Interior;


ANTHONY FOXX, in his official capacity as Secretary of Transportation;


THOMAS J. VILSACK, in his official capacity as Secretary of Agriculture;


PENNY PRITZKER, in her official capacity as Secretary of Commerce;


ASHTON CARTER, in his official capacity as Secretary of Defense;


JOHN KERRY, in his official capacity as Secretary of State;


GINA MCCARTHY, in her official capacity as Administrator of the EPA;


For over fifty years, the United States of America has known that carbon dioxide (“CO2”) pollution from burning fossil fuels was causing global warming and dangerous climate change, and that continuing to burn fossil fuels would destabilize the climate system on which present and future generations of our nation depend for their wellbeing and survival. Defendants also knew the harmful impacts of their actions would significantly endanger Plaintiffs, with the damage persisting for millennia. Despite this knowledge, Defendants continued their policies and practices of allowing the exploitation of fossil fuels.


Case 6:15-cv-01517-TC Document 1 Filed 08/12/15

h/t to Dennis Ambler

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
August 19, 2015 10:10 am

Not one of those kids has lived through any global warming at all, which reveals the big problem with being indoctrinated: you’re the last to know.

Curious George
Reply to  cheshirered
August 19, 2015 10:34 am

They may not have observed any global warming, but they just KNOW.

Reply to  Curious George
August 19, 2015 1:44 pm

It’s just a, well, feeling.

Reply to  Curious George
August 19, 2015 7:48 pm

Yea, it’s “the vibe of the thing”.

ferd berple
Reply to  cheshirered
August 19, 2015 2:09 pm

What specific harm has been done? How do you sue for harm that “might” occur?
for example: can I sue you because your car might hit mine at some point in the future? Should the courts force you to stop driving as a result?

Reply to  ferd berple
August 19, 2015 2:37 pm


average joe
Reply to  ferd berple
August 19, 2015 7:02 pm

America has become a nutless wonder. Make America grow some balls again. Vote Trump!

Eyal Porat
Reply to  cheshirered
August 19, 2015 11:48 pm

Do not confuse us with, err.. facts!

August 19, 2015 10:10 am

Well, at least they’re not blowing them up this time. Once you realise they don’t have a moral floor, never mind a parental one, you’ve got your head adjusted when dealing with them.
“That child’s hurt eyes at the end of that clip reminded me inescapably of that toddler trying to stand up straight enough in the middle of some adult dispute they should never have been dragged into. Shame on you Mother, shame on you.”

Gary Hladik
Reply to  Pointman
August 19, 2015 3:39 pm

Thanks for the link, Pointman. I read the article and watched the video, which led me to more articles and videos, and so on. So much wisdom, so little time…

August 19, 2015 10:11 am

Ideological child abuse.

Reply to  PaulH
August 19, 2015 12:37 pm

That’s not a new thing for every cause .

August 19, 2015 10:12 am

This beginning to feel like Clockwork Green!

August 19, 2015 10:12 am

Hansen loves the little children
All the children of the world
Red and yellow black and white
They are precious in his site
Hansen loves the little children of the world

Reply to  Stu
August 19, 2015 4:10 pm

With BBQ sauce.

Peter Miller
August 19, 2015 10:12 am

Legal ecolunacy – from Mann to Hansen, there is a trail which shames the name of science.

Reply to  Peter Miller
August 19, 2015 10:47 am

They need lawyers to enforce their brand of science.

Gunga Din
Reply to  Dawtgtomis
August 19, 2015 11:24 am

True. The facts sure don’t.

August 19, 2015 10:22 am

Just let the Vatican handle the complaints by the children.

Reply to  Resourceguy
August 19, 2015 2:20 pm

Ouch ! 🙂

Bruce Cobb
August 19, 2015 10:23 am

What next; give them green shirts and teach them to goose-step?

August 19, 2015 10:23 am

At least Schrödinger had the good grace to use his cat in his work, rather than the children. A bit harsh on the feline itself and cat lovers maybe but at least no children were harmed.

Tom J
Reply to  EternalOptimist
August 19, 2015 12:35 pm

True, but a cat can’t sue. Heh, but neither can children.

August 19, 2015 10:36 am

As a tax paying ciitzen of the United States, I am disgusted that our government has to waste time and money defending itself from nuisance lawsuits such as this. The Weather Channel (aka the Climate Channel) here in the U.S. gave this story many, many minutes of time last Saturday morning. I was just trying to find out if it would rain that day, and they kept droning on and on about these noble kids. Frustrated, I switched off the TV and looked in the local newspaper for the weather, which was accurate enough. Interesting that Hansen was behind it. Thanks for the info.

David A
Reply to  Edward Giugliano
August 19, 2015 12:26 pm

What makes you think the government does not want to be found guilty

Reply to  David A
August 19, 2015 1:24 pm

Perhaps so. But they still have to expend resources to answer the plantiff’s charges. Even if the answer is, “Present!” (old Obama joke).

Reply to  David A
August 20, 2015 5:38 am

Hell, I assumed the government was PAYING for these kids to sue it so they can be found ‘guilty’ of not doing what they want to do.
Standard EPA tactics.

Reply to  David A
August 20, 2015 9:17 am

Yup. A tried-and-true tactic by EPA, sue-and-settle. And as part of the settlement, you get the government (you and me) to pay for the plaintiff’s lawyers.

Reply to  Edward Giugliano
August 19, 2015 1:57 pm

TWC couldn’t predict 12:30 at 12 noon, much less anything weather related. You are better off asking a shaman for the weather report. Seriously. There is a reason why very few people cried when DirecTV dropped TWC from their satellite lineup.

Reply to  Edward Giugliano
August 19, 2015 4:11 pm

What makes you think they are going to defend themselves. The EPA has perfected the tactic of helping eco-activists come up with lawsuits, which the EPA dutifully loses, then they have a court order requiring them to do what they wanted to do all along, but couldn’t get congress to authorize.

Reply to  Edward Giugliano
August 21, 2015 4:05 am

“our government has to waste time and money defending itself”
I think you misunderstand. Your government is actually paying Hansen to do this. It will raise a token defence and lose. Then they will claim that every action is to comply with this judgement.
The EPA has been doing that for years.

August 19, 2015 10:39 am

So when somebody becomes a lawyer, and has law offices with an address in a mini-mall and everything, they still can’t afford their own email address and have to use gmail.

Reply to  Dan
August 19, 2015 12:59 pm

Can a lawyer use gmail (or any Google cloud, or any cloud service) for client-lawyer correspondence?

Reply to  simple-touriste
August 19, 2015 1:31 pm

Uh… yes? Why wouldn’t they be able to? I’m not even sure what you think “Google cloud” means in this context, but the fact mail servers are run by Google in no way means a lawyer shouldn’t use them for communication with clients. A large enough law firm would certainly prefer to have its own mail servers, but for smaller setups, something like Gmail will likely be more secure than any homebrew.system they’d create.
There’s no reason to expect Gmail to snoop into your e-mails and violate your clients’ privacy. It could happen, of course, but if it did, it’d be such a major thing that it’d affect millions of people. A business that employs maybe half a dozen people generally doesn’t take many precautions against events of that magnitude.

Reply to  Brandon Shollenberger
August 19, 2015 2:56 pm

Unless you encrypt what you put on drive or in the cloud, Google and any other ad based service provider will index your data so they can send you targeted ads, moreover; it can always be accessed by subpoena. I know for sure that Google makes it hard for anyone to gain access to personal information (even employees). They also encrypt user data before storing it on their disk drives and all traffic between data centers is now encrypted, but of course, they have the keys.

DD More
Reply to  simple-touriste
August 20, 2015 10:42 am

Brandon where were you last year?? No reason to expect Gmail to snoop into your Data?
Since leaked documents revealed that Internet companies like Apple, Facebook and Google were giving the National Security Agency vast access to people’s online information under a scheme codenamed PRISM, those Silicon Valley titans have taken pains to deny participation in such a program.
Your friendly neighborhood NSA backdoor pipeline at work.

August 19, 2015 10:40 am

So Hansen is helping minors to give the president an excuse that he was forced by authority to scuttle the economy by enacting chokehold restrictions of industrial and agricultural activities on his way out of office.
Sounds like an inside job which exploits the minors.
If the children truly desire this action, then they can wait until they are of age to vote and participate in governmental affairs to effect changes which they have well explored the consequences of. We have a lower age limit on government offices for a reason.

Reply to  Dawtgtomis
August 20, 2015 9:21 am

They have done this before. Activists went to every state and used either a legislative or petition process supposedly initiated by children to make the same argument, happened about 5-6 years ago. All were turned back. What a waste of time.

August 19, 2015 10:41 am

Hey, in US law, Burden of Proof lies with the Plaintiff. Call their bluff, let them have their day in court. It’s a lose lose with the Gubmnet. Unless……this is a very clever ruse by said Gubment to enact law via legal proxy. The EPA have form in this area.

Ken Medearis
Reply to  ALeaJactaEst
August 19, 2015 10:56 am

Exactly right. EPA will feign to defend itself, then settle, having established a precedent as well as funding Hansen et al with more taxpayer funds to further the grab. It’s a watermelon’s win-win

Reply to  Ken Medearis
August 19, 2015 2:24 pm

Any court settlement should go to the children in trust until some significant warming does actually occur.

Reply to  ALeaJactaEst
August 19, 2015 4:13 pm

They will just point to all the lies from the last few decades about how storms are bigger, etc, won’t matter that there is no evidence to support the claim. The EPA is recognized as the expert in this matter and others won’t be given grounds to put forth alternate information.

August 19, 2015 10:41 am

My mind boggles!

Gregory Lawn
August 19, 2015 10:42 am

Much of their climate “science” having been exposed as junk, they now resort to using their own children as pawns in a pointless exercise to get attention for their cause. Do they presume no one else cares about children? Very disturbing. Lesson learned; If you cannot win with the facts among your peers then move to the courts were you need not convince other scientists.

Reply to  Gregory Lawn
August 19, 2015 12:12 pm

You say “If you cannot win with the facts among your peers…”
Actually, you can’t:

Joseph Murphy
Reply to  warrenlb
August 19, 2015 12:27 pm

Ah yes, Government. Always my first source for top rate propaganda, err, science. No vested interests there!
Let’s see what dynamite science we have here… “Multiple studies published in peer-reviewed scientific journals1 show that 97 percent or more of actively publishing climate scientists agree: Climate-warming trends over the past century are very likely due to human activities.”
Voting on adverbials of probability, rock solid stuff! Now that’s science, kids.

Reply to  warrenlb
August 19, 2015 12:33 pm

No, its actually from multiple peer-reviewed studies of polling results.

Joseph Murphy
Reply to  warrenlb
August 19, 2015 12:46 pm

If you call subjective interpretation, often in disagreement with the actual authors, a poll. Then, sure. Do you even read these studies? How about their filtration methodologies? I sight to behold! I’m referring, of course, to Cook, et al. Or, perhaps you were referring to Doran? More like a voluntary response, shot gunned mailing questionnaire, but I’ll accept ‘poll’, sure. But, according to that ‘poll’, I’m a true believer as well! Whoda thunk it?!

Reply to  warrenlb
August 19, 2015 1:49 pm

Hi there Warren,
You never did supply a citation for the quotes you gave in an earlier post.
Have you found it yet please?

Reply to  warrenlb
August 19, 2015 3:14 pm

@Joseph Murphy
Lets see. On the one hand we have Joseph Murphy and other random amateurs posting on WUWT. On the other hand we have NASA Scientists quoting peer-reviewed results. Which should one believe? Its soooooo hard. Not.

Reply to  warrenlb
August 20, 2015 4:27 am

These “peer reviewed” findings Popeye?
I trust a poster on WUWT more.

Reply to  warrenlb
August 19, 2015 3:18 pm

Hi there Jones. What citation are you seeking?

Reply to  warrenlb
August 19, 2015 3:33 pm

learn what is meant by peer review.

Reply to  warrenlb
August 19, 2015 3:40 pm

Joseph Murphy,
Pay no atention to warrenlb, he’s just proselytizing his debunked eco-religion. He says: Which should one believe? <– Perfect comment from a religious fanatic who can only use the Appeal to (corrupted) Authorities for his arguments. Actual facts get in his way.
I do not believe NASA or anyone else completely. But I trust much more in satellite measurements, which show no warming for many years — thus debunking wlb's belief system. Satellite measurements show no warming for almost twenty years.
As for the 'consensus' that the planet has been warming, well, sure it has — naturally, since the Little Ice Age. But current CO2 emissions have nothing measurable to do with it. As pointed out, global warming has stopped, while CO2 continues to rise. So much for the 'dangerous MMGW' conjecture. It was wrong.
All the correct predictions in the world cannot 'prove' a hypothesis or a conjecture. But all it takes is one wrong prediction to falsify a conjecture or hypothesis.
The climate alarmist crowd has never made an alarming prediction that was correct. They have all been flat wrong. Thus, the ‘dangerous man-made global warming’ scare that warrenlb is constantly trying to prop up has been repeatedly falsified. That conjecture is a dead duck.
But ‘dangerous MMGW’ is warrenlb’s religion, so no rational argument or data can ever convince him that he’s wrong. He is just an amusing old man, a self-admitted has-been (I usta be a v.p.!) who tries to sell his alarmist nonsense to folks who know better than he does what’s real, and what isn’t.

Reply to  warrenlb
August 19, 2015 4:15 pm

It doesn’t matter how many junk surveys you add, the results are still junk.

Reply to  warrenlb
August 19, 2015 7:31 pm

August 19, 2015 at 3:18 pm
Hi there Jones. What citation are you seeking?”
Thank you for replying. For this post (below) you made the other day. Where did you get it from?
August 11, 2015 at 1:59 pm
Steyn chose three quotes as promo material to represent the book’s contents. One of the scientists has recently co-authored a paper confirming Mann’s hockey stick graph, and notes that his quote only appears damning because it lacks all context. A second has worked on a major paper that also confirmed Mann’s hockey stick graph, and has stated that the attacks on Mann “have no justification.” The third quote is from a physicist who doesn’t work on climate change, so he can’t accurately be described as one of Mann’s scientific peers.
For all his quote mining, it seems like the best Steyn could do when it came to finding criticisms from Mann’s peers is write up two quotes from scientists who agree with Mann’s findings and one from someone who’s not a climate scientist at all. Looks like Steyn’s efforts here fall as flat as the handle on Mann’s hockey stick.

Can I please have citations? Did you write this yourself or did you copy the above from somewhere else?

Reply to  warrenlb
August 20, 2015 1:52 pm


August 19, 2015 10:45 am

The crux of the matter is that now they have to prove it in order to be successful in their suit. And I’m not sure they can, in fact I’d bet against them being able to.

August 19, 2015 10:46 am

an order from the District Court of Oregon, requiring Obama to implement a national plan for the reduction of atmospheric concentrations of CO2 to 350 ppm by the year 2100.
So they think that a district court in Oregon can compel the United States (through its president) to compel the world to reduce CO2 levels? How is this to be accomplished? By the bombing the rest of the world back to the stone age?
I’m not sure if it is the stupidity or the arrogance that burns, but burn it does.

CD in Wisconsin
Reply to  dmh
August 19, 2015 11:49 am

DMH: I think they’re talking about a NATIONAL plan here, not a global one. That implies to me anyway that these young people are naive, gullible and brainwashed enough to believe that the U.S. can bring down CO2 levels to 350 ppm all by its lonesome. It is (or should be) common knowledge that Obama is not going to necessarily get the co-operation of other major CO2 emitters like China to help him bring levels down to 350. We’ve been seeing that a pow-wows like the one at Copenhagen — and likely will again in Paris later this year.
The incredible arrogance of people like Hansen preclude them from being open-minded enough to realize there might be problems with the CO2-induced CAGW theory, and that brings out the stupidity of Hansen for all the world to see. And yes, it does burn.

Reply to  dmh
August 19, 2015 2:27 pm

Furthermore, bringing atmospheric CO2 levels back down below 350ppm would significantly reduce the food’s food supply. Do the brain-wash little children realise that?

Reply to  dmh
August 19, 2015 3:15 pm
Reply to  warrenlb
August 19, 2015 3:16 pm

Should have been addressed to CD in Wisconsin

Reply to  dmh
August 19, 2015 5:02 pm

1895 is not the stone age. We were doing okay then.

Reply to  trafamadore
August 20, 2015 4:40 am

Yea, I hear Polio and Small Pox were a riot!

Reply to  dmh
August 19, 2015 8:16 pm

They should have included the military in their list of plaintiffs because the only power the listed parties have is national. To control global CO2 levels we need to declare war as well as cool the oceans.

Harry Passfield
August 19, 2015 10:47 am

Counsel for the Plaintiff: “Your Honor, for over fifty years, the United States of America has known that carbon dioxide (“CO2”) pollution from burning fossil fuels was causing global warming and dangerous climate change”
Judge: “And you have evidence of this – you can prove this?”

Reply to  Harry Passfield
August 19, 2015 11:19 am

Counsel for the Plaintiff: “Your Honor, for over fifty years, the United States of America has known that carbon dioxide (“CO2”) pollution from burning fossil fuels was causing global warming and dangerous climate change”
Judge: “Fifty years? You mean since 1965 when we had global cooling? ?”
CftP: “Yes, your honor, Global warming causes global cooling….”

Gunga Din
Reply to  BobM
August 19, 2015 11:41 am

Hansen on the stand: “Yes, your Honor. The Globe has been warming for 50 years. I adjusted up the numbers myself.”

Gregory Lawn
Reply to  Harry Passfield
August 19, 2015 12:34 pm

Council for the defense (Obama Administration): “we concur with plaintiffs complaint your honor, we have no defense.”
There are no rational litigants in this case!

August 19, 2015 10:48 am

Oregon. Figures. Boy, that place sure went down the toilet.

HGW xx/7
Reply to  Jeff
August 19, 2015 11:29 am

And how. I grew up in western Oregon and got the hell out at 18. Moved to the beautiful State of Eastern Washington, but have been exiled to Seattle for three years thanks to work relocation.
Seattle and Portland are poison and alone have ruined this once vibrant, wild, and free corner of the U.S.

Mike Henderson
Reply to  HGW xx/7
August 20, 2015 9:38 pm

“beautiful State of Eastern Washington”
Shhhhhhhhhh! Speaking of mosquitoes, we had one come in on approach at Felts Field the other day but he saw a delivery truck that needed a ring job thought it was DDT and only did a touch and go.

Reply to  Jeff
August 19, 2015 12:01 pm

It is the Progressives, that moved up from California. They wrecked their state and couldn’t stand to live there anymore, so they moved and brought their ideology with them, because they are just plain stupid. Although, I went to school with a very intelligent guy, until he went to Reed college in Portland and started smoking dope. He dropped out and started selling used cars, I think, and teaching daycare in Eugene. Maybe some of his former students are plaintiffs in this matter. Maybe, it is never too young for parents to get their children started on drugs, at least in Eugene??? Such a pity. Gone are the days of Tom McCall: come and visit, then leave.

Reply to  DAN SAGE
August 19, 2015 2:43 pm

I grew up in Portland, then the locusts came up from California, yep. It’s really la-la land out there now. Moved away at 18 also, would never, ever go back to live. May never go back at all. So sad. Such a beautiful place.

Reply to  Jeff
August 19, 2015 3:36 pm

Politically yes. With fault on both the left and right.
However Oregon is still one of the greatest places to live. I’ve lived or worked in 32 states. Enjoyed just about every one. But none can top Oregon.

Michael 2
Reply to  timg56
August 19, 2015 8:00 pm

Pretty much every time I visit Oregon or travel through it I hop out of the car to gas up only then to have an attendant come rushing out saying it is against the law in Oregon to pump your own gasoline.
“And yes, there is an obvious disadvantage to the full-service law: When New Jersey residents travel out of state, they are sometimes befuddled when they pull into a self-service-only gas station and realize they have to get out of the car and pump their own fuel.”

Bubba Cow
August 19, 2015 10:52 am

the flip side – further adventures with propaganda, no child left behind, and the every child gets an award generation
The Coddling of the American Mind

Tom J
Reply to  Bubba Cow
August 19, 2015 12:43 pm

Hi Bubba,
Amazing, isn’t it?

Bubba Cow
Reply to  Tom J
August 19, 2015 12:53 pm

shocking anyway

Reply to  Bubba Cow
August 19, 2015 8:34 pm

Thanks Bubba. Great read. Summed up the distorted mental processes of global warming fanatics too.

Mark from the Midwest
August 19, 2015 10:58 am

On the surface this smells of fraud and child abuse, I honestly did not think my opinion of Hansen could get any lower, but he never ceases to amaze.

Tom J
Reply to  Mark from the Midwest
August 19, 2015 12:49 pm

It doesn’t just smell, it stinks. In fact, it reeks. These people could care diddly squat about their children’s needs (although, they fatuously profess to do so). What they really care about is having the children satisfy their own adult needs. That is profoundly self centered and immature.

Nicholas J. Harding
August 19, 2015 11:00 am

Cases like this have been dismissed in the past as being not justiciable as political questions that are to be resolved by the Congress. That should be the result here.But one never knows how a given federal judge may act.

August 19, 2015 11:00 am

I wonder if they can convict Hansen of violation of Child labor laws. The only thing he is doing is making Soros Rich for free.

August 19, 2015 11:02 am

I demand that King Cnut tax me into the Stone Age to stop the tide from coming in!

David A
Reply to  LarryFine
August 19, 2015 2:32 pm

Perhaps the children can sue Obama for their inheritance of close to twenty trillion dollars in debt.

Michael Jankowski
Reply to  David A
August 19, 2015 3:08 pm

They don’t have that rammed down their throats in school.

Reply to  LarryFine
August 20, 2015 3:37 am

It’s a pity people don’t read things and make all sorts of claims based on preconceived ideas.
King Canute was actually making a point to his sycophantic courtiers that he COULD NOT control nature.

Reply to  Alex
August 20, 2015 12:14 pm

Oh, most of us know that, Alex. But it still makes a good metaphor.
Especially since king ‘this is when the sea stops rising’ Obama stepped into the Whitehouse. >¿<

August 19, 2015 11:09 am

I’ve no doubt that the framers of the Constitution never envisioned the judiciary as a player in creating policy. As an instrument to keep the legislative and administrative branches from usurping more authority than granted, as a brake, yes but not as a driver in setting policy that should be left to the legislative branch of government! This is what comes of too many lawyers in public office!

Greg Woods
Reply to  fossilsage
August 19, 2015 11:24 am

Just too many lawyers, period.

Gunga Din
Reply to  Greg Woods
August 19, 2015 11:30 am

To be be fair, there are lawyers whose goal it is to uphold the law. The problem is there are too many whose goal is to exploit the law.
(And to many of those are the ones who write and rule on the law.)

Reply to  Greg Woods
August 19, 2015 4:17 pm

The primary purpose of the legal system is to employ and enrich lawyers.

Kevin Kilty
August 19, 2015 11:11 am

I bet this suit moves faster than Mann v. Steyn.

August 19, 2015 11:16 am

Somebody should explain Social Security to them.

Dennis Bird
August 19, 2015 11:17 am

They need to sue for mental anguish from all of the lies they have been told. It really is approaching mental illness.

Svend Ferdinandsen
August 19, 2015 11:20 am

“and that continuing to burn fossil fuels would destabilize the climate system on which present and future generations of our nation depend for their wellbeing and survival. ”
Somebody should tell these kids that their wellbeing and survival up to now is based on burning fossil fuels.
Without that they would possible not be. They are very welcome to stop using these fossil fuels and all that’s dependent on it. Why wait for the court, it can only be too slow.

August 19, 2015 11:22 am

Another sue and settle gambit?

August 19, 2015 11:25 am

These types need to stay in the news in order to make more money. Which Swiss chalet is he looking at now.

August 19, 2015 11:26 am

Does this include sniffing glue and e-cigs?

Gunga Din
August 19, 2015 11:26 am

Next question: Who’s paying for the lawsuit?
(I’m sure it’s not Al Gore. He loves Green too much to part part with it.)

JJ, too.
August 19, 2015 11:42 am

So what evidence does anyone have that 350 ppm and 2 degrees have ANY correlation with each other whatsoever?

Reply to  JJ, too.
August 19, 2015 12:23 pm
Reply to  warrenlb
August 19, 2015 2:31 pm

He asked what evidence. and you link to roflmao !!!
TOWARDS 700ppm aCO2 !!!… The world will rejoice. 🙂

Dave in Canmore
August 19, 2015 11:43 am

I didn’t see Richard Windsor’s name as a defendant!! /sarc

August 19, 2015 11:43 am

There has been a similar law suit in the Netherlands.
The court in 1st instance ruled in favour of the plaintiffs, but it is likely that the Dutch State will appeal this decision.
The interesting question from a legal perspective, is whether the court can demand greater action from a government based on a request of one or a couple of individuals. If yes, this will open a can of worms. Everybody could start a case against the State to demand something.
Interesting times!

August 19, 2015 11:51 am

Is this an opportunity to challenge the EPA “Endangerment Finding” and force EPA to release the “secret data” that proves CO2 (and warming) is harmful?
This may be the “Discovery” event I have been anticipating.

August 19, 2015 11:52 am

“So, kids, you going to give up all those energy wasting appliances? You know, your TV, your computer, your Xbox . . . “

Tom J
August 19, 2015 11:53 am

Are all sharp objects removed from one’s hands and pockets? Has all food been properly swallowed? Is there no water or more interesting liquids in anybody’s mouth? Is everybody properly seated? Because our legal system has become so stupendously silly as to allow the U.S. government to become sued on behalf of a god. And, no, the god is not Obama. Ready? Let’s take it away:
‘Plaintiff Xiuhtezcatl Tonatiuh M., by and through his guardian and mother Tamara Roske-Martinez, is a 15-year-old citizen of the U.S. … For nine years, Xiuhtezcatl has advocated for reductions in CO2 emissions before local, state, federal, and international governmental bodies, including … before the United Nations, and … President of the United States. …’
Are we getting warmed up? It’s nice to know that Xiuhtezcatl (sounds like an Aztec God, eh? We will see.) has been engaged in political lobbying since the age of 6 [(six), (1+1+1+1+1+1 birthdays)]: a number that he probably had difficulty counting to at the time. And, it’s nice to know that this lobbying (starting at the age of 6) was not about such pertinent issues for a six year old (1+1+1+1+1+1 years) as stopping frequently on a trip to satisfy potty needs (bye pooh; bye; say goodbye to the pooh); or moving from a tricycle to training wheels on a two wheeler; or being tucked in properly in the evening; or complaining that Uncle Joe (guess who that is) is too scary when he plays Frankenstein. No, no, no, this lobbying effort initiated at the age of six years (1+1+1+1+1+1 birthdays – ok, I’ll stop repeating that) was not about those silly frivolities. It was about a molecule in the atmosphere (two words of which he probably couldn’t have even pronounced at the time). But, let’s get to the god part:
’21. Of Aztec descent, Xiuhtezcatl engages in sacred indigenous spiritual and cultural practices to honor and protect the Earth. Xiuhtezcatl has suffered harm to his spiritual and cultural practices from Defendants’ actions. …’
Ok, now my mother was goofy. That’s not a criticism, just an observation. I mean, anybody looking at me would automatically recognize that anybody who produced Tom Judd would have to be goofy. But, I thank my lucky stars that my mother wasn’t so goofy as to put me, at the age of six (1+1+1+1+1+1 birthdays), in front of heads of state so I could regurgitate exactly what she told me to regurgitate and to regurgitate things I could not properly have understood at the time. I thank my lucky stars that my mother wasn’t such a wack job as to think she could live vicariously through my body which happened to be a separate entity than her’s. I thank my lucky stars that my mother didn’t ludicrously think she was preparing me for adulthood by ramrodding an interest in rituals appeasing gods that no sane person still believes exists. And, I thank my lucky stars that no matter how much my parents ruthlessly embarrassed me as I was growing up I can at least find solace in knowing that someone else had a parents that embarrassed them even more.
Whoa, be unto these guardians. I think, instead of being afraid of CO2, we need to be afraid of guardians.

Bubba Cow
Reply to  Tom J
August 19, 2015 12:25 pm

and now as parents ourselves …
my “kids” laugh at this farce while I tell them, “keep your hands on your wallets”

August 19, 2015 11:53 am

Excuse me, but since when has the United States of America been a sentient, individual being, capable of “knowing” anything? And how do they plan to prove what it knew or didn’t know 50 years ago? The people living in it today certainly do not agree on what can be known, proven regarding fossil fuel caused warming! The IPCC changes what it “knows” in every report!
Oregon, way to foster critical thinkers!

Gunga Din
Reply to  Aphan
August 19, 2015 12:09 pm

Pot’s legal in Oregon. They now know lots of things that ain’t so.

Reply to  Gunga Din
August 19, 2015 3:38 pm

Wrong state.
Recreational pot is legal in WA and CO. Not in Oregon. Medical usage is legal.

Reply to  Gunga Din
August 20, 2015 12:53 pm

Medical usage is legal.

Then unless Medical Marijuana is strictly inforced as a prescription drug under pharmacy rules, it is essentially legal. The police aren’t going to even try to prosecute anyone unless the get caught doing something crazy stupid like transporting tons of it or hand it out on a playground.

Gunga Din
Reply to  Gunga Din
August 20, 2015 1:22 pm

timg56, thank you for the correction but schitzree has a point.

Reply to  Gunga Din
August 21, 2015 9:37 pm

It is legal for rec use. It is not legal to sell yet … October. It was going to be next year per the original rule, but the good legislature thought it was important to get legal access sooner and moved the date up a few months.

Reply to  Aphan
August 19, 2015 12:21 pm

You say: “The people living in it today certainly do not agree on what can be known, proven regarding fossil fuel caused warming!”
Oh really:

Reply to  warrenlb
August 20, 2015 1:32 am

They seem to have missed the CO2 line in the graph, at least showing correlation. Is there a reason for that?

Mike Maguire
August 19, 2015 12:02 pm

Would make more sense to sue them over cutting beneficial CO2 emissions since:
Sunshine +H2O +CO2 +Minerals = O2 +Sugars(food)
But then, I guess we need to keep CO2 and temperatures fixed at the low level that they were at before humans started burning fossil fuels………..because a group of all knowing humans has decided for all of life on this planet, what the perfect level of CO2 and temperature is………and how we should obtain it.

Reply to  Mike Maguire
August 19, 2015 12:16 pm

You ask “what the perfect level of CO2 and temperature is………”
And “how we should obtain it….”
Your answers: , and

Bubba Cow
Reply to  warrenlb
August 19, 2015 12:29 pm

absolutely the first place we all should go for science counseling is 350 dot orgy

Tom J
Reply to  warrenlb
August 19, 2015 1:09 pm

I enjoy this line from the site: ‘Mosquitoes, who like a warmer world, are spreading into lots of new places, …’ Perhaps that intellectual from the site should visit the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge where he/she would discover that mosquitoes are so abundant that they can literally suck a pint of blood out of a ‘delicate’ caribou on a daily basis. Last time I checked the Arctic wasn’t a warmer part of the world.

Reply to  warrenlb
August 19, 2015 1:32 pm

The position seems to be that similar to venial sin being the damnation of the soul, CO2 is the damnation of the planet. Right. Whatever.
While they are stupid enough to claim the perfect CO2 concentration is 350 PPM they at least have not gone so stupid as to claim to know the perfect temperature.
BTW why does their writing style seem to be that of a parent speaking to a 12 year old? I guess there is a populace of adults that like being treated like a child, but it is surprising since many a 12 year old readily know when an adult is full of hot air instead of substance.

Mike Maguire
Reply to  warrenlb
August 19, 2015 6:18 pm

From your 2nd link:
“As long as fossil fuels remain artificially cheap and profitable, their use will rise. Correcting this market failure requires their price to account for their true social costs.”
Yes, let us consider the TRUE social costs/benefits:
“The positive externalities of carbon dioxide by Dr. Craig Idso, Center for the study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change”
“The Social Benefit of Carbon: $3.5 Trillion in Agricultural Productivity over the past 50 years. Projecting this monetary into the future is likely to bestow an additional $9.8 trillion between now and 2050.”
Based on the real world, maybe we should be PAYING entities that emit this beneficial carbon dioxide.

Reply to  warrenlb
August 19, 2015 7:55 pm

Thanks for the link. Was done by the National Lampoon or the Daily Onion?

August 19, 2015 12:05 pm

Wrong target…..They should be going the oil companies.

Walt D.
August 19, 2015 12:07 pm
Follow the money. The case will be settled out of court.. However, the Federal Government will agree to pay the plaintiffs legal fees. Quite a scam.

Reply to  Walt D.
August 19, 2015 12:18 pm

@Walt D.
You say: “…The case will be settled out of court…”
Maybe, maybe not:

Reply to  warrenlb
August 19, 2015 1:46 pm

Regardless of whether the Hague has jurisdiction or the judgement has any practical significance or whether the Dutch government ignores them or appeals the decision for more political theater, it is completely irrelevant to the collusion between the EPA and environmental organizations.
It’s like bringing up the smell of lavender soap in a discussion about farm tractors.
Speaking of smell, the smell of the collusion between the EPA and environmental organizations is worse than the smell of a toxic waste dump. Oh to go back to the simple days when the EPA cleaned up toxic waste instead of releasing it into rivers.

Reply to  warrenlb
August 19, 2015 2:11 pm

You say: “Regardless of whether the Hague has jurisdiction or the judgement has any practical significance or whether the Dutch government ignores them or appeals the decision for more political theater, it is completely irrelevant to the collusion between the EPA and environmental organizations.”
But not irrelevant to the question posed: ‘Will the case be settled out of court, or not”

Reply to  warrenlb
August 19, 2015 3:40 pm

your understanding of the law equals your understanding about climate change.

Tom J
Reply to  Walt D.
August 19, 2015 1:15 pm

This case should not be settled out of court. It should be thrown out of court. If these people want to act like morons, talk like morons, and be morons, they have every right to do so. But they have no right whatsoever to expect me to do so or to pay so much as one single penny for them to be so. It’s really time for taxpayers to begin to rebel against this crap. If the judge doesn’t throw this case out of court throw the judge out of court. By the ears.

August 19, 2015 12:57 pm

Could this be the reason behind his scorched Earth approach to climate science?

Reply to  co2isnotevil
August 19, 2015 1:55 pm

At some point Hansen left science behind, falling in love with political activism. At that time NASA was not resisting his science, but instead his acting as a half-baked political hack and thereby abusing his relationship with NASA.
Nine years later and he is still half-baked political hack or maybe he has graduated to full fledged deluded incompetent fool.

Reply to  Alx
August 19, 2015 7:56 pm

He left science behind before he made his famous stage play to the Senate.

August 19, 2015 1:07 pm

They should be suing for the economic damages to their future wealth caused by excessive government borrowing to fund climate boondoggles like wind and solar projects (Solyndra, to name one). A reality, not myth.

Reply to  Gary
August 19, 2015 1:12 pm

I think they should sue the IPCC and its many co-defendants (Hansen being one) who are committing fraud against the developed world by subverting science for the purpose of extorting money to be used for redistributive economics under the guise of climate reparations.

August 19, 2015 1:13 pm

I think Mr Hansen should travel to malls across the united states, going up to children and telling them, their government is putting their lives at risk and most liking causing a horrible death to them and their friends. He could be very successful, right up to the point an irate father takes him aside and pummels him or the police arrest him for harassing minors.

August 19, 2015 1:15 pm

Its more of the same BS used to dramatized rising CO2. just interviewed me about this

Bubba Cow
Reply to  jim Steele
August 19, 2015 1:38 pm

good work though fighting against the current and probably knowing they’d give Julia Olson the last word
as a scientist (retired) and particularly as a parent, I find this revolting –

Mike Maguire
Reply to  jim Steele
August 19, 2015 7:10 pm

“One of the plaintiffs is the granddaughter of James Hansen, former director of the NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies, and an outspoken environmental advocate who in 2009 said, “Climate change is analogous to Lincoln and slavery or Churchill and Nazism: it’s not the kind of thing where you can compromise.”
The part about Nazism is correct but they are the Nazi’s………..focusing on brainwashing the public with exaggerated propaganda rooted in speculative theories that are not verifying. Distorting the effects of a beneficial gas, calling it pollution, while vilifying others that use the scientific method in being skeptical.
“The science is settled!” “The debate is over!” Those that disagree are “Deniers” and “Flat earthers”

August 19, 2015 1:28 pm

I would like to know who are paying the legal fees etc.
Remember Follow the money and it leads to who gains!

Chuck L
August 19, 2015 1:29 pm

Hansen is beyond repulsive using unknowing children as pawns in his lust to send the U.S. and the rest of the fossil-fuel using world back to the Middle Ages when people had a life expectancy of 35 years and for the most part were subsistence farmers. He claims to be for nuclear power but based on his actions, is paying lip-service at best.

August 19, 2015 1:36 pm

Looks like Steyn’s description of the US legal system as a toilet and septic tank are on the mark. Truly a place where anyone can sue anyone else over anything and then have it drag on for maybe decades just to keep the mostly corrupt lawyers in business. And since ~90% of congress ARE lawyers, not likely to change.

K. Kilty
August 19, 2015 1:45 pm

Hansen I think is absolutely sincere in his beliefs. Nonetheless, the man had seen all the evidence he needed 27 years ago when he proclaimed to Congress that he was 99% certain about global warming, even though he made no such claim of certainty in the reviewed literature. He has become doctrinaire and dogmatic. However sincere his belief, he is a person that makes the world a worse place, and would, if he had the power, make the world much worse for these children he uses.
But here is the problem with his demand in a nutshell. There is no magic control that anyone in the U.S. has to take the entire atmosphere back to 350ppm, by year 2100 or another other future date, unless he or someone else can get the entire world to agree to a suicide pact. In the thinking of automatic controls, there is no control variable available to do such a thing in the hands of an American Government no matter how autocratic it becomes.

Reply to  K. Kilty
August 19, 2015 2:14 pm

Sorry for stepping on your entry, K. Must have been typing after you had posted.

Kevin Kilty
Reply to  sciguy54
August 19, 2015 8:49 pm

No problem. Great minds think at the same time.

August 19, 2015 1:58 pm

“The 21 young plaintiffs sought an order from the District Court of Oregon, requiring Obama to implement a national plan for the reduction of atmospheric concentrations of CO2 to 350 ppm by the year 2100”
Well, it will be impossible for the US to implement any national policy which will lower the worldwide CO2 levels to 350ppm by 2100. I guess the best we can do will be to kill every child, big and little, along with every adult and cease all human activity within the US. It will be a harsh learning moment, but it will allow each child to experience first hand the consequences of his/her demands.

Michael Jankowski
Reply to  sciguy54
August 19, 2015 3:14 pm

If gives new meaning to “going nuclear” when it comes to CO2 reduction.

Hot under the collar
August 19, 2015 2:04 pm

A clear case of child abuse.
You should be encouraging an 8 year old to look forward to life not using them to further your own beliefs by worrying, indoctrinating and depressing them with fear of future ‘death by climate change’. This is the same technique suicide cult leaders use, many of these children are going to end up clinically depressed, I wouldn’t be surprised if half of them don’t end up in a suicide cult because of fear that life will not be worth living. Idiots.
What next? Children countersuing because the climate scare hoax has caused them poverty and bankruptcy?

August 19, 2015 2:16 pm

When is the insanity going to stop? When we get the liberals out of education? When we only vote non-career politicians into congress? When we sharpen our pitchforks and head to DC? Because I’m mad as hell and I’m not going to take this anymore!

August 19, 2015 2:17 pm

Looking at the list of pro-AGW defendants, does anyone think there will be a vigorous defense against the charges? Imagine what kind of evidence would be presented countering the claim if this was anything more than a show trial for public consumption to promote the AGW cause. This is a complete sham and a perversion of true justice. I’m sickened.

Louis Hunt
August 19, 2015 3:10 pm

Americans aged 8-19 filed the lawsuit. None of them have ever experienced a change in climate during their entire lifetimes outside normal variability. So on what basis can they claim any damages?
I suspect the Obama Administration secretly requested this lawsuit. They made sure it was filed in a liberal place like Oregon. If the court orders Obama to reduce CO2, it will give him an excuse to bypass Congress. Chances are, he will reach an out-of-court settlement and agree to all the demands. The court will then make the agreement official. If Congress or anyone else takes legal action against him, he will have the court agreement to back him up. It will take the Supreme Court to stop him, but by then he will have implemented his programs and put many fossil-fuel companies out of business.

August 19, 2015 3:59 pm

Abominable! Of course the world was just perfect at 350ppm. Or was it? Well there goes another $xxxtrillion.

August 19, 2015 4:08 pm

What’s cute is that these low information types actually believe that the courts have the authority to order the executive branch to do anything.

Louis Hunt
Reply to  MarkW
August 19, 2015 5:24 pm

Unfortunately, the past tells us something different. It’s not so much that the courts can order the executive branch around. More likely, the executive branch, especially the EPA, will settle a lawsuit by agreeing to make the changes requested. If they agree to do it, they’re not being forced. They often agree to pay court costs and sometimes damages as well, which invites more lawsuits from environmental groups.

August 19, 2015 4:14 pm

So, no adults are receptive to your enticements ?
Now you target children.
There is a word for that.

August 19, 2015 4:35 pm

This is beyond stupid, it’s so far beyond, you can no longer see stupid ..
50 former IPCC experts don’t agree that we are in any danger:
Dr John Christy: “Little known to the public is the fact that most of the scientists involved with the IPCC do not agree that global warming is occurring. Its findings have been consistently misrepresented and/or politicized with each succeeding report.”

August 19, 2015 4:37 pm

Why Oregon? Is there no fine for filing idiotic lawsuits in Oregon?

August 19, 2015 5:10 pm

Title IX goes to James Hansen.

August 19, 2015 5:35 pm

Is it a coincidence that there are 21?
Just a thought

August 19, 2015 7:32 pm

Is this the same James Hansen who predicted that the Major Degan Parkway would be under six feet of water by…I forget, 2000? Yet, it is still being used every day. Idiots.

August 19, 2015 7:57 pm

Hansen is a profoundly evil man.

August 19, 2015 9:21 pm

I think this lawsuit is so ridiculous that it will get dismissed at some point or another, for some reason or another, before a trial starts. In the likely event that happens, then I think it’s evidence of the court process working well.

August 19, 2015 11:02 pm

Having grown up in Eugene OR where this is happening I am so glad I moved North and sat down In Vancouver WA USA to get away from all the nuts and liberal arts university shoving out lawyers. Luckily you can be a Ducks fan anywhere. Here in Vancouver WA the fight is over the US largest oil terminal being built. It is looking good but like the Keystone XL taking to long to permit.

August 19, 2015 11:30 pm

Hopefully a big costs order.
These people are shameless. Not the revolting use of children, but the fact that they are distracting busy and important people with this nonsense suit. (Then again, stopping Obama doing his day job might actually be a plus.)

August 20, 2015 12:38 am

August 20, 2015 6:33 am

It wouldn’t bother me if there was an actual possibility a judge would not side with the government and have the case thrown out.

August 20, 2015 8:00 am

Using children like this, in pursuit of a political ideological goal, none of whom have ever experienced any ‘global warming’, is disgusting. It is an abomination.

William McClenney
August 20, 2015 5:08 pm
David Walton
August 21, 2015 6:02 pm

There is no bar too low for Hansen and his gang.

Verified by MonsterInsights