“The science isn’t proven,” said Mandi Risko, a spokesperson for FTI Consulting and a contributor to Energy In Depth, a research and public outreach project of the IPA, a trade group.
Thought the EPA already had a Superfund for ecological disasters, this is just creating a new fund and rebranding it under the so-called climate change, double taxation so to speak. As Mystic William stated, make them prove that it is indeed causing so-called climate change.
They won't, because they can't make the correlation and correlation does not imply causation anyway. Once again they will find that the government, especially the military, is the worst polluter of all. So essentially the government should fine themselves for any harm to the climate.
This is how I feel about charging Ralph Baric and Fauci etal for SARS COV2. Charge them. Baric’s defense will win. He will say ‘prove it to exists’ and then easily defend that. Let it be shown in court no one can prove COVID even exists. Put Walensky et al on the stand and watch her say ‘we never found it’. Which is why I don’t see the government ever charging anyone.
In a way I am happy about this. Provided the oil companies fight it well. The science cannot show what they claim they can now prove. Discovery would show this. As would putting these numbskulls on the stand. The woman politician claiming they now can prove with certainty the effects of emissions and what cost that is to society. Put her on the stand. Also they are claiming world wide emissions of some company have caused changes in Vermont. So, why sue that company? Why not sue the biggest polluter on the planet, the Chinese government? Since they are suing on world wide emissions?
What I would really like to see though is all the oil companies pull out of Vermont. And say ‘it is too expensive for us to do business there’. After the state shuts down for a week, with chaos ensuing (and Tesla drivers driving around like Captain America), then have the gas stations re-open and charge $10 a gallon.
This is essentially just taxation. Excise taxation calculated on a specific metric, most likely sales compared to a cost (of damages). Still it’s just taxation. Like all taxation, it’s paid for by the people/consumer as it becomes a cost of doing business. Maybe just introduce excise taxation on petroleum instead? It’s a lot less of a populist position and more viable over time.
This is a full-employment effort by lawyer.
Thought the EPA already had a Superfund for ecological disasters, this is just creating a new fund and rebranding it under the so-called climate change, double taxation so to speak. As Mystic William stated, make them prove that it is indeed causing so-called climate change.
They won't, because they can't make the correlation and correlation does not imply causation anyway. Once again they will find that the government, especially the military, is the worst polluter of all. So essentially the government should fine themselves for any harm to the climate.
This is how I feel about charging Ralph Baric and Fauci etal for SARS COV2. Charge them. Baric’s defense will win. He will say ‘prove it to exists’ and then easily defend that. Let it be shown in court no one can prove COVID even exists. Put Walensky et al on the stand and watch her say ‘we never found it’. Which is why I don’t see the government ever charging anyone.
But that would maybe, just maybe, show everyone what sort of lies public science has become.
In a way I am happy about this. Provided the oil companies fight it well. The science cannot show what they claim they can now prove. Discovery would show this. As would putting these numbskulls on the stand. The woman politician claiming they now can prove with certainty the effects of emissions and what cost that is to society. Put her on the stand. Also they are claiming world wide emissions of some company have caused changes in Vermont. So, why sue that company? Why not sue the biggest polluter on the planet, the Chinese government? Since they are suing on world wide emissions?
What I would really like to see though is all the oil companies pull out of Vermont. And say ‘it is too expensive for us to do business there’. After the state shuts down for a week, with chaos ensuing (and Tesla drivers driving around like Captain America), then have the gas stations re-open and charge $10 a gallon.
What I suspect will happen though is the oil companies will agree to a ‘carbon’ tax in Vermont.
This is essentially just taxation. Excise taxation calculated on a specific metric, most likely sales compared to a cost (of damages). Still it’s just taxation. Like all taxation, it’s paid for by the people/consumer as it becomes a cost of doing business. Maybe just introduce excise taxation on petroleum instead? It’s a lot less of a populist position and more viable over time.