State AG’s and activists trying to forge attribution link between weather and climate

From Climate Litigation Watch, the war to link weather and climate from a legal standpoint is about to heat up:

Activist AG Admission: Washington State AG Declined Climate Nuisance Suit Because of Insufficiency of ‘Attribution’ Claims

Newly revealed emails, wrongly hidden from public by OAG, further suggest origin of renewed “Attribution” push

CLW readers are aware of the new, plaintiffs’ bar-driven push to claim an ability to attribute climate change — all the way down to responsibility for individual storms, weather apparently is climate when it’s the right kind of weather — just as the first AG #ExxonKnew trial approaches, later this month.

Obviously, that case has become an accounting dispute, and has little to nothing to do with climate. It does however seem that certain parties would like to orchestrate some climate background music to give a different sense and, of course, when actual climate trials do occur plaintiffs’ lawyers hope to point juries to specific storms, that they may have personally experienced, as less abstract and so a necessary part of the lawyers’ appeals to emotion.

But we also have recently learned what happened next: the lawyers got the activists working on a more convincing stab at claiming attribution. We now know that lead attorney Vic Sher requested the newly released attribution paper with a 1965 baseline, the paper that is so energizing some in the media to write up stories furthering its narrative.

Full story here (worth a read)

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
October 10, 2019 10:30 am

When will citizens be able to sue the government for not making the weather benign and pleasant? It’s obviously failed in its duty to make us all happy and secure and ought to be made to pay for its negligence.

Reply to  Gary
October 10, 2019 11:27 am

The government should start by passing amendments to the laws of thermodynamics. Then it could start to control the weather.

Reply to  Phillip Bratby
October 10, 2019 12:11 pm

The laws of physical or social domains? We already have a Twilight Amendment which aided and abetted establishment of spontaneous human conception, conflation of sex and gender, semantic and conceptual progressions, etc. Besides, they have a consensus. Quod erat demonstrandum.

Crispin in Waterloo but really in Beijing
Reply to  Phillip Bratby
October 10, 2019 4:37 pm

Phillip B

I think there is precedent for that. Was it not declared by some government, in law, that Pi = 3 ?

Where as that?

John F. Hultquist
Reply to  Crispin in Waterloo but really in Beijing
October 10, 2019 8:04 pm
It never became law.

“The Indiana Pi Bill is the popular name for bill #246 of the 1897 sitting of the Indiana General Assembly, one of the most notorious attempts to establish mathematical truth by legislative fiat”

Greg Woods
Reply to  Gary
October 10, 2019 11:35 am

Alaska Supreme Court hears youth climate change lawsuit

ANCHORAGE, Alaska (AP) — An Alaska law promoting fossil fuel development infringes on the constitutional rights of young residents to a healthy environment, a lawyer told Alaska Supreme Court justices on Wednesday.

A lawsuit filed by 16 Alaska youths claimed long-term effects of climate change will devastate the country’s northernmost state and interfere with their constitutional rights to life, liberty and public trust resources that sustain them.

The state’s legislative and executive branches have not taken steps to lower greenhouse gas emissions and adopted a policy that promotes putting more in the air, said attorney Andrew Welle of the Oregon-based Our Children’s Trust group.

Reply to  Greg Woods
October 10, 2019 1:19 pm

Did the 16 youths give back their Alaska Permanent Fund Dividends?

Reply to  Gary
October 10, 2019 12:06 pm

“CLW readers are aware of the new, plaintiffs’ bar-driven push to claim an ability to attribute climate change — all the way down to responsibility for individual storms,

Wow! do you think they will be able to predict lightning strikes as well?



Joel Snider
Reply to  Gary
October 10, 2019 1:21 pm

Probably. I seem to remember they burned witches over the weather, back in the day.

Reply to  Gary
October 10, 2019 4:12 pm

Especially here in CA where the gov’t’s decades of neglecting culling forests of dead trees and clearing around power linesis now putting 100’s of thousands of Californias (particularly those who live in rural areas, those deplorable ya know) into energy poverty every time the wind blows. The only way to make them pay is at the polls, but since they never endanger the electricity in the cities (e.g., San Francisco, Hollywood, Malibu, Sacramento) — where their voters congregate, there’s not much hope.

It’s the Roman empire all over again, exploit the provinces to supply bread and circuses to Roman mob.

October 10, 2019 10:31 am

It won’t be long now before some ‘saviour of humanity’ in black robes issues a judicial edict from the bench that compels the planet’s climate(s) to behave in a manner that does not offend the genuinely-held beliefs of certain sections of the community.

Such orders are to be served upon those in charge of the climate(s).

Unfortunately, Mr Obama has now retired, so it is not presently known who can now declare the moments when the seas stop rising, and the planet begins to heal.


Steven Fraser
Reply to  Mr.
October 10, 2019 1:18 pm

…In Camelot!

J Mac
October 10, 2019 10:33 am

Further confirmation of the dishonest duplicity of Washington state Attorney General Bob ‘Duck and Weave’ Ferguson. The corruption in The Socialist Peoples Paradise of Washington is Venezuelan in magnitude and pervasiveness.

Reply to  J Mac
October 10, 2019 11:21 am

Yes. And it is worth noting Bob Ferguson never misses a chance to sue the Trump Administration. About one lawsuit every three weeks or less. Ferguson not taking this one on says a lot.

Leland Laird
Reply to  J Mac
October 10, 2019 12:22 pm

We in Washingstan refer to him as Sideshow Bob. Surprised he hasn’t filed suit against Santa Claus for his illegal discrimination against naughty kids.

Gary Pearse
October 10, 2019 10:42 am

How can anyone read a thing like this? They should put some coherent piece together amd show a few of the examples. I guess legal folk can read this stuff

Reply to  Gary Pearse
October 10, 2019 3:19 pm

Requires patience, and an affinity for multiple layers of paperwork detail. It’s like 3D chess, maybe, in keeping track of the folks and how they move around in their circles of associates. Involves Naomi Oreskes, if that gives you some reassurance.

Bruce Cobb
October 10, 2019 10:44 am

A great way to tell if the State AG’s and activists are telling the truth would be to weight them down, and throw them in the river. If they float, then they are telling the truth. If not, well….

Reply to  Bruce Cobb
October 10, 2019 7:50 pm

I thought it was, if they float they’re witches (liars) and shall be burned at the stake, but if they don’t come up again (drown) they’re deemed pure (honest).

Reply to  Red94ViperRT10
October 10, 2019 8:16 pm

Oh, I remember now, if the water accepts them (they don’t come up again) they are innocent but if the water rejects them (they somehow free themselves from their bindings and come to the surface) they are guilty and subsequently executed.

Mark Broderick
October 10, 2019 10:47 am

“Asteroid may collide with Earth, ESA warns: ‘Non-zero… probability'”

Reply to  Mark Broderick
October 10, 2019 5:09 pm

Asteroids are colliding with the earth every day, more like every minute.

October 10, 2019 10:48 am

Working on a Highschool Science Fair Project on Global Warming we discovered that it is more difficult than expected. We published the Experiment and suddenly the data disappeared from the NAS Website. That isn’t a joke. Here are the Posts:
The Case of the Disappearing Data

An Easy High School Experiment to Debunk CO2 Driven Climate Change

J Mac
Reply to  CO2isLife
October 10, 2019 11:10 am

This should posted as a separate article…. it’s that important.

Reply to  J Mac
October 10, 2019 1:23 pm

WUWT, please do what you want with those posts and that topic. Luckily the Kids I was working with made a video of how to do the project so they have video evidence that it existed, and now it is gone.
I’ll post a link once the kids publish it. Thanks for the comment JMac

Tom Abbott
October 10, 2019 10:50 am

Next thing you know, they will be calling Michael Mann as an expert witness. He likes to attribute current weather systems to CO2, without any evidence, of course.

CO2 seems to be falling down on the job as far as hurricanes go. Not much going on out there.

Greg Woods
Reply to  Tom Abbott
October 10, 2019 11:39 am

Global Warming, AGW version, causes more hurricanes, except when it causes fewer….

October 10, 2019 11:39 am

“Vegetables & Grains; what my food eats.”

Whenever I am drawn into this subject my “go to” position is to tell people to count the teeth in their head and eat in that ratio. They didn’t get there by accident.

Dr. Bob
October 10, 2019 12:03 pm

So yesterday in the Denver area it was 81°F and today it snowed 4″ and is 22°F. Is this related to Climate Change? Hardly. We are now witnessing the “End of Snow”. NOT.

What a time we live in.

Reply to  Dr. Bob
October 10, 2019 1:12 pm

At this rate the temperature will be negative 155 by this weekend.

October 10, 2019 12:04 pm

Conflation of logical domains. An ensemble of simulations with insufficient resolution and incomplete characterization. Liberal license of assumptions, assertions to fill in the missing links with brown matter. Trying? They have a consensus.

Pat Frank
October 10, 2019 12:10 pm

Let me point you to my recent paper, Propagation of Error and the Reliability of Global Air Temperature Projections, which demonstrates that attribution of warming to CO2 emissions is currently impossible and unjustifiable.

Climate models are unable to resolve the effect, if any, of CO2 emissions on climate. They are predictively useless.

The IPCC literally does not know what it’s talking about.

Reply to  Pat Frank
October 10, 2019 1:26 pm

Add to yours Berry and Harde that show the rise in CO2 is nearly all natural, Munshi who shows no response in atmospheric CO2 to changes on emissions, and now Soon and Connolly ( that show there is no enhanced greenhouse effect in the atmosphere, and it should be very difficult to argue human attribution convincingly.

October 10, 2019 12:25 pm

“weather apparently is climate when it’s the right kind of weather”

One of the fundamental issues that will NEVER go away is that the concept of ‘climate’ has flaws. In other words, it’s not really scientific. It’s an idea. When you measure, it’s weather. When you want it to be something else, it’s a statistical abstraction.


Joel Snider
October 10, 2019 12:38 pm

I swear – some days the fat-f*** factor just weighs you down.

Joel Snider
Reply to  Joel Snider
October 10, 2019 1:03 pm

Okay – that was supposed to be ‘rat’.

I shouldn’t have gotten out of bed today.

October 10, 2019 1:42 pm

But climate change is causing legal agendas to expand and evolve into political donor results and legal outsourcing trends.

William Haas
October 10, 2019 1:50 pm

The reality is that the Earth’s climate has been changing for eons yet the change is so small that it takes networks of very sophisticated sensors, decades to even detect it. One must not mix up true global climate change with weather cycles that are part of the current climate. Based on the paleoclimate record and the work done with models, the climate change we are experiencing today is caused by the sun and the oceans over which mankind has no control. Despite the hype, there is no real evidence that CO2 has any effect on climate and there is plenty of scientific rationale to support the idea that the climate sensitivity of CO2 is zero. It is all a matter of science.

AGW is not a proven theory but rather a conjecture. AGW sounds plausible at first but upon a more detailed examination one finds that the AGW conjecture is based on only partial science and is full of holes. For example there is the idea that CO2 acts as a thermostat and the increasing CO2 in the atmosphere causes warming because CO2 has LWIR absorption bands that cause CO2 to trap heat. CO2 based warming causes more H2O to enter the atmosphere which causes even more warming because H2O also has LWIR absorption bands and hence causes H2O to trap even more heat. So according the ths AGW conjecture H2O acts to amplify any warming that CO2 might cause. Al Gore in his movie, “The Inconvenient Truth” presents a chart showing CO2 and temperature for the past 650.000 years. There is an obvious correlation between CO2 and temperature which Al Gore claims shows that CO2 works as a thermostat and that more CO2 in our atmosphere causes warming. But a closer look at the data shows that CO2 follows instead of leeds temperature. It is higher temperatures that cause more CO2 to enter the atmosphere because warmer water does not hold as much CO2 as does cooler water. Contrary to what AL Gore claims, there is no evidence that the additional CO2 causes warming. On the plot, Al gore included where CO2 is today. CO2 is much higher than one would expect form the warming of the oceans and the proximate cause of the increase in CO2 is mankind’s burning of fossil fuels. According to the chart, if CO2 were the thermostat of global warming then it should be a heck of a lot warmer that it actually is but it is not. If anything, Al Gore’s chart shows that CO2 does not cause global warming as Al Gore claims.

H2O is actually a stronger absorber of IR than is CO2 on a molecule per molecule basis. According to he AGW conjecture, the idea is that CO2 warming causes more H2O to enter the atmosphere which causes even more warming which causes even more H2O to enter the atmosphere which causes even more H2O to enter the atmosphere and so forth. This positive feedback effect does not really require CO2 based warming but will operate on H2O based warming alone. This positive feedback effect, if true, would make Earth’s climate very unstable with H2O based warming causing more H2O to enter the atmosphere causing even more warming causing even more H2O to enter the atmosphere until all the bodies of water on Earth boiled away. Such an event would cause the barometric pressure and temperature of the Earth’s surface to be much higher than it is on Venus but such has never happened. What the AGW conjecture ignore’s is that besides being the primary greenhouse gas, H2O is a major coolant in the Earth’s atmosphere moving heat energy from the Earth’s surface to where clouds form and where heat energy is more readily radiated to space. The over all cooling effect of H2O is evidenced by the fact that the wet lapse rate is significantly less than the dry lapse rate in the troposphere. So instead of providing a positive feedback amplifying any warming that CO2 might provide, H2O provides negative feedback and retards any warming the CO2 might provide, Negative feedback systems are inherently stable as has been the Earth’s climate for over the past 500 million years, enough for life to evolve because we are here.

The AGW conjecture depends upon the existence of a radiant greenhouse effect in the Earth’s atmosphere caused by trace gases with LWIR absorption bands. A real greenhouse does not stay warm because of the action of heat trapping gases but rather stays warm because the glass limits cooling by convection. It is entirely a convectime greenhouse effect that keeps a real greenhouse warm. No radiant greenhouse effect has been observed, So too on Earth where gravity and the heat capacity of the atmosphere acts to limit cooling by convection. Derived from first principals, the Earth’s convective greenhouse effect causes the surface of the Earth to be roughly 33 degrees C warmer than it would otherwise be. 33 degrees C is the amount derived from first principals and 33 degrees C is what has been observed. Any additional warming caused by a radiant greenhouse effect has not been observed. The radiant greenhouse effect has not been observed in a real greenhouse, in the Earth’s atmosphere no on any planet in solar system with a thick atmosphere. The radiant greenhouse effect is nothing but science fiction so hence the AGW conjecture is nothing but science fiction as well, This is all a matter of science.

Then there is the “scientific” consensus argument. But there is no real consensus. It is all is all just speculation. Scientists never registered and then voted on the validity of the AGW conjecture. But even if they had it would be meaningless because science is not a democracy. The laws of science are not some sort of legislation. Scientific theories are not validated by a voting process. The AGW conjecture must really be on shaky ground if “consensus” is one of the reasons for us to believe in it.

But even if we could somehow stop the Earth’s climate from changing, extreme weather events and sea level rise would continue unabated because they are part of the current climate. We do not even know what the optimum global climate is let alone how to achieve it. The previous interglacial period, the Eemian, was warmer than this one with more ice cap melting and higher sea levels yet no tipping points ever happened. In the past, the Earth’s CO2 levels have been much higher than they are today and no tipping points ever happened. There is no real evidence that a climate emergency exists. It is all a matter of science.

The bottom line here is that climate change, extreme weather events, and sea level rise are all caused by Mother Nature. So as far as suing for damages, Mother Nature is the responsible party. Lots of luck trying to collect on a judgement against Mother Nature.

October 10, 2019 1:54 pm

A must watch…

Gordon Dressler
Reply to  jmorpuss
October 11, 2019 8:19 am

Well . . . a must watch if you want some unintended humor.

At 3:46 into the video there is this statement: “Well, to make it simple, without the particle forcing they have been using only irradiance for the last 40 years, and it has a tiny variation of 0.1% over the primary eleven year solar cycle. That’s not going to allow for much climate forcing in any imaginable model.”

But immediately following (at 4:04) there is this statement covering a graph indicating the change in total solar irradiance due to “Largest Solar Outbursts in 12 Years”: “But more importantly, irradiance does THIS during titanic solar outbursts. Seriously, the largest deliveries of energy to Earth from the Sun show up as negative climate forcing.”

What is laughable is that the presented graph’s y-axis shows that during this “Largest Solar Outbursts in 12 Years” event the TSI momentarily decreased from about 1360.9 W/m^2 to about 1359.4 W/m^2. That is a variation of—you guessed it— 0.1%.

Gunga Din
October 10, 2019 3:30 pm

“Ambulance Chasers” are now become “Storm Chasers”?
Let me guess.
They’ll push for jury trials and the trials to be held in California?

Gunga Din
October 10, 2019 3:33 pm

“Ambulance Chasers” are now become “Storm Chasers”?
Let me guess.
They’ll push for jury trials and the trials to be held in California?
Or some other “Left Coast” state? (Preferably in a “Sanctuary City.)

Kevin kilty
October 10, 2019 3:59 pm

I would say this is stunning, but I no longer am surprised by anything as the war on reason, science and economics runs far ahead of any cynicism I can muster. The tobacco settlement is something like an analog here, except that no one really needed tobacco while everyone and everything energy. Thus, the state governments are trying to cut themselves a new helping (remember they already collect taxes on everything) of everything.

If these folks are successful, it will be interesting to see if wealth is merely transferred from the unfavored to the favored, or whether wealth actually shrinks. I have sat for jury duty before and as a result have no faith in the placement of 12 reasonable individuals. This will be greed, and the sort of pathology that Schneidermann represents, leading the ignorant. I won’t be surprised if they haven’t also drawn an Obama appointed judge.

October 10, 2019 6:53 pm

As you know sir, these attributions are made post hoc with climate models.
I have shown in this post that they contain a built-in confirmation bias.
Two links below:

October 11, 2019 7:36 am

State AG’s would do better to note the link between the uptick in illness in people living near industrial wind turbines – turbines now exceeding 600 feet with same setbacks as 400 foot turbines. 1200 feet setbacks from homes is a health hazard.

October 11, 2019 7:37 am

State AG’s would do better to note the link between the uptick in illness in people living near industrial wind turbines – turbines now exceeding 600 feet with same setbacks as 400 foot turbines. 1200 feet setbacks from homes is a health hazard.
This is not a duplicate!

October 11, 2019 9:47 am

Manitoba rediscovers winter…

In summer, when a storm blows through and leaves damage in its wake, crews can scramble quickly to make repairs. This is much different, Owen said.

“The storm we have moved in [Wednesday] and is still hanging over us today and will persist into the night and into tomorrow, continually causing damage,” he said.

Manitoba Hydro said it would hire private contractors to remove the downed branches and trees.

“We understand completely people’s frustration and the inconvenience to this. We are working as quickly as we can and as safely as we can to restore power as soon as possible,” Owen said.

“But the weather is our enemy.”

%d bloggers like this: