Slashdot Mirror


Global Warming To Be Put On Trial?

Mr_Blank writes to mention that the United States' largest business lobby is pushing for a public trial to examine the evidence of global warming and have a judge make a ruling on whether human beings are warming the planet to dangerous effect. "The goal of the chamber, which represents 3 million large and small businesses, is to fend off potential emissions regulations by undercutting the scientific consensus over climate change. If the EPA denies the request, as expected, the chamber plans to take the fight to federal court. The EPA is having none of it, calling a hearing a 'waste of time' and saying that a threatened lawsuit by the chamber would be 'frivolous.' [...] Environmentalists say the chamber's strategy is an attempt to sow political discord by challenging settled science — and note that in the famed 1925 Scopes trial, which pitted lawyers Clarence Darrow and William Jennings Bryan in a courtroom battle over a Tennessee science teacher accused of teaching evolution illegally, the scientists won in the end."

3 of 1,100 comments (clear)

  1. Re:The goal of the chamber by drinkypoo · · Score: 5, Informative

    and it is now a conclusive scientific consensus that it is happening and that human action is contributing to it

    Even the Bush administration admitted these things before they left the building. The idea of suing for scientific consensus is about the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard... no, wait, being forced to give creationism equal time in class is a more ludicrous idea. But this is close...

    --
    "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  2. Re:They are NOT Denying Global Warming by je+ne+sais+quoi · · Score: 5, Informative

    My question is this: What is the EPA _really_ trying to accomplish with this? Covering CO2 under the Clean Air Act would completely hamstring American businesses, forcing them to severely cut CO2 emissions

    This is completely and utterly false. In other words, it isn't true. Case in point: Germany, like many other EU states has implemented a carbon tax to limit CO2 emissions. It's working in that Germany's emissions are now below the Kyoto accord requirements. All this, yet Germany's economy is recovering from their recession, and the recovery is faster than the U.S. recovery is. Lastly, the carbon taxes have all been projected to increase the number of jobs, not "hamstring" businesses like you say:

    The positive effects of the ecological tax reform were highlighted by the Federal Environmental Bureau (Umweltbundesamt) in early 200210 when it stated that by the end of that year, its projections showed that ecotaxes would have reduced CO2 emissions by more than 7 million tonnes while at the same time creating almost 60,000 new jobs. Other researchers 11 were even more positive, saying that between 176,000 and 250,000 new jobs would be created. These figures were based on the assumption that the trade unions would moderate their wage demands by linking any increases in gross pay to changes in prices and productivity.

    So when you look at the actual evidence, carbon taxes do pretty much precisely exactly the opposite of what you said. Do yourself a favor and stop reading talking points written by Exxon.

    --
    Gentlemen! You can't fight in here, this is the war room!
  3. Re:They are NOT Denying Global Warming by spectrokid · · Score: 5, Informative

    Oh yes please, PLEASE continue like this. CO2 reduction is BAD for American companies!!! In the mean while, here in Denmark we will develop CO2 reduction technology like insulation, biofuels and windmills. Ten years from now, you can then come back to this forum and ask yourself why Uncle Sam lost all its jobs to a "socialist" welfare state.

    --

    10 ?"Hello World" life was simple then