Now, That’s a Timeline

From Climate Litigation Watch

Posted on October 11, 2019

Public records reveal the Real Story behind climate “attribution”

Part of the PR campaign that’s been in the works for weeks to promote a new climate “attribution” study — made necessary by reluctant attorneys general and with the baseline year prescribed by a climate nuisance lawyer — is this Guardian “Timeline”.

Relying on public records including those obtained in open records litigation productions from reluctant AGs, CLW has produced a rather more informative chronology of the claim of “attribution”:

[Check out the full timeline at the link just above ~ctm]

0 0 votes
Article Rating
29 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
markl
October 12, 2019 6:16 pm

“Attribution” is the new boogeyman? They are hard to keep track of.

Charles Higley
Reply to  markl
October 12, 2019 6:29 pm

ALL, that is ALL if the attribution that CO2 is the culprit to everything is the entire backdrop and foundation of the entire time line. Without ever checking the science these idiots have run with v=bad science and made a living from pursuing false conclusions. It’s truly frightening how far this has gone off the rails.

Rocketscientist
Reply to  Charles Higley
October 12, 2019 6:45 pm
Reply to  Charles Higley
October 12, 2019 7:00 pm

Good comments Charles.

But to be clear, The covert plan of the radical greens is unfolding exactly as planned…
… and it never was about the climate.

Regards, Allan

THE COST TO SOCIETY OF RADICAL ENVIRONMENTALISM
By Allan M.R. MacRae, B.A.Sc., M.Eng., July 04, 2019
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2019/07/04/the-cost-to-society-of-radical-environmentalism/
[excerpt]

1. Introduction.

Ever wonder why extremists attack honest scientists who oppose global warming and climate change hysteria? Ever wonder why climate extremists refuse to debate the science?

It is because global warming and climate change alarmism was never about the science – it was always a false narrative, a smokescreen for the totalitarian objectives of the extreme left.

The novel “Nineteen Eighty-Four”, written by George Orwell in 1949, foresaw a time “when much of the world has fallen victim to perpetual war, omnipresent government surveillance, historical negationism and propaganda”. It now appears that Orwell had remarkable foresight.

Here is the real “Nineteen Eighty-Four”, an interview that year with ex-KGB officer and Soviet defector Yuri Bezmenov, who described their long-term program to ideologically undermine the western democracies. Jump to 1:07:30 for Bezmenov’s discussion of “ideological subversion”. It is all about manipulating the “useful idiots” – the pro-Soviet leftists within the democracies.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y3qkf3bajd4&feature=youtu.be

One commenter on the video wrote: “this is crazy, almost everything predicted by this guy is already happening.” Bernie Sanders, AOC and other socialist-Democrats are openly saying what Bezmenov predicted decades ago. The last democracies are under attack by leftist extremists.

All over the world, countries that once had a future have fallen into dictatorship, poverty and misery. It is notable that of the ~167 large countries in the world, most are totalitarian states, and all but “the chosen few” citizens of these countries suffer under brutal leftist dictatorships.

Radical greens have used wildly exaggerated stories of runaway global warming and climate change to stampede the gullible, in order to achieve their political objectives. The greens claim to be pro-environment, but their policies have done enormous environmental damage. Radical greens have also been destructive to humanity, causing millions of deaths.

************************************

JS
Reply to  markl
October 14, 2019 7:06 am

What is attribution? This is new to me.

October 12, 2019 6:23 pm

President Trump should promise a WhiteHouse celebration in 12 years when the planet will be ending. Makes no difference who will be in the White House – if the world will be ending, no one will be there anyway.

Make sure to invite 28 year old Greta!

Marc
Reply to  tomwys
October 13, 2019 4:46 am

Now 10 years and 360 days and counting.

Scissor
October 12, 2019 6:23 pm

Crop yields up. Starvation down. Life expectancy up. Infant mortality down. Global connectedness up. War deaths down. Global temperature up. Freezing deaths down.

The crisis is a shakedown.

Al Miller
Reply to  Scissor
October 12, 2019 6:28 pm

Cut ”them like scissor! Well said!

Ken Davis
October 12, 2019 6:32 pm

Who would have thought lawyers, insurers and banks would find a way to profit from irrational fear.

Neville
October 12, 2019 6:36 pm

So what is this climate emergency over the last 30 years , 50 years 100 years, etc?
Everyone is much healthier, wealthier, have greater life expectancy, better nutrition, much easier lifestyle etc than at anytime in human history.
The average global age today is over 70 and Chinese life expectancy has soared to 76 over the last 40 years and today they generate 66.7% of their TOTAL energy from coal. See IEA data.
And today global deaths from extreme weather events have dropped by 96% compared to 100 years ago.
Population then was 1.8 bn ( 1920) people and today is 7.6+ bn people. This is a modern miracle, yet we have these loonies who can’t understand these very simple sums.

Chaswarnertoo
Reply to  Neville
October 13, 2019 5:02 am

They don’t want to. That means they’re the idiotic failures we said they were. Gretins.

Reply to  Neville
October 13, 2019 1:58 pm

But, Neville, you have not considered the intangibles, something I just can’t put my finger on …

Mr.
October 12, 2019 6:59 pm

See, the reason one becomes more enlightened about climate studies by reading skeptical sources is that they invariably include the content from the ‘consensus’ sources.

Just reading the ‘establishment’ climate science means one is deprived of exposure to any contrary questioning commentary, thereby leaving one half-informed.

And what rational person would want to remain half-informed about any topic of public interest?

Samuel C Cogar
Reply to  Mr.
October 13, 2019 7:44 am

But iffen ya only got “half a brain” …… then the best ya can do is become “half informed”.

October 12, 2019 7:03 pm

The murky history of “event attribution science”
and its murkier details under the hood.

https://tambonthongchai.com/2018/07/10/event-attribution-science-a-case-study/

Kevin kilty
Reply to  chaamjamal
October 13, 2019 9:30 am

Informative. Thanks.

Katie
October 12, 2019 7:36 pm

I couldn’t agree more Charles – it’s frightening – all right – that science can be misused and abused like this in the 21st century – Lavoisier , Galileo and applying the scientific method – who would’ve thought??
they must be turning over in their graves again and again!! Good God! where is she??

Susan
October 12, 2019 8:04 pm

I see Orestes mentions Venice as a victim of climate change but even the Guardian (Jonathan Buckley 2.11.16) admits that the big problem is poor management of the lagoon. Groundwater extraction is also another factor.

DMA
October 12, 2019 8:17 pm

All of this attribution is based on the assumptions that human CO2 causing all of the rise is atmospheric CO2 and that caused all of the warming. Harde 2019 and Berry 2019 prove the human portion of increased CO2 is about 3% of the rise. Connollys have their radiosonde study coming soon (See( https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XfRBr7PEawY ) that shows there is no greenhouse effect in our atmosphere so none of the warming has been caused by Exxon or any other oil outfit. It has all been natural.

Ed Zuiderwijk
October 13, 2019 1:36 am

The link contains a cornucopia of names to hold to account for damages to reputation and livelihood when the counter litigation starts in earnest.

Questing Vole
October 13, 2019 2:51 am

It suited big oil to pay lip service to ‘clean energy’ policies that would destroy coal first as a competitor to their gas in electricity generation. They deserve a kicking for that.

Crispin in Waterloo but really in Beijing
Reply to  Questing Vole
October 13, 2019 6:34 am

It is a surprise that there is not more recognition that BP (British Petroleum) was very early into solar PV promotion and manufacturing.

They had a slogan “beyond petroleum” which emphasized their branching into alternative energy products. That was a long time ago.

It is not clear to me why the lawsuits are against the fuel companies in terms of the emissions, because they don’t have that much to measure. The emission of CO2 is by their customers, not the vendors.

The concept of “undeclared risk to the shareholders” is silly. No stock market guarantees a level of risk, let alone the courts As petroleum products become more scarce the price will rise. More $$. The future “stranded assets” are the hugely expensive wind turbines and their grid connections. Look at California! The power is off “because they are there”. Is the power company being sued because they failed to warn the investors of the downside risk of fires caused by equipment failure?

Berndt Koch
Reply to  Crispin in Waterloo but really in Beijing
October 13, 2019 8:45 am

“It is not clear to me why the lawsuits are against the fuel companies in terms of the emissions, because they don’t have that much to measure. The emission of CO2 is by their customers, not the vendors.”

They can’t create lawsuits against the customers, they would have to sue themselves and where is the money in that?

Actually I think the lawyers missed a trick, they could have doubled their money by being both prosecution and defense..

Coeur de Lion
October 13, 2019 6:23 am

When is any of this coming to court? Defending companies will destroy the CAGW case won’t they? Good to watch?

Hum
October 13, 2019 6:53 am

What about the Chinese attribution?

Gary
October 13, 2019 9:18 am

We learned in the 1960s and 1970s that the government lies to us. Viet Nam. Wage and price controls. National deficit. Underfunded state and local pension plans. What evidence exists that it’s changed its ways? How will raiding the finances of energy companies solve a non-existent problem? More lies.

michel
October 13, 2019 10:37 am

Also, this is America destroying itself.

In the cause of reducing its own 5 billion tons a year out of a global total of 37 billion, and rising. Even do these guys succeed, even are they right about CO2 and climate, it will have zero effect on global temps.

old construction worker
October 13, 2019 1:09 pm

Do you think the Guardian would publish a “Timeline” of IPCC predictions that didn’t come true? Yep, I also, don’t think so.

%d bloggers like this: