A Legal Anaylsis of Climate ‘Science’
With few exceptions, the common law upon which US jurisprudence is based employs one of two “burdens of proof” in litigation: the “beyond a reasonable doubt” standard used in criminal prosecutions, a very high bar requiring compelling evidence; or the “preponderance of the evidence” standard employed widely in civil cases, a sort of 51 percent test that the claims of a party are “more likely than not” true. These standards are usefully transferred to environmental issues including global warming and ecotoxins.
Plastic wind turbines and heat pumps join the pack of polluting industries … which are without doubt climate-polluting in their manufacture.
In science, there was once a logical process built on the idea of hypothesis, graduated to theory, and accepted as “law” when proved by repeated evidentiary experimentation. In our current climate cult, the so-called climate science is treated as “law” by “consensus” — not by scientific proof. At best, science can be said to have surmounted the lesser legal burden of proof of preponderance: surely not “beyond a reasonable doubt.”
Yes, I expect many will howl that “We don’t have the luxury of waiting for the proof,” but I here propound the very opposite — beyond all reasonable doubt, we do not possess the luxury of this toxic cult any longer. In pursuit of the dubious, unscientific claim that greenhouse gases are warming the planet, humanity is releasing ecotoxins that kill plant and animal (including human) life, and that remain in the environment essentially forever.
There may be equivocal science about how toxic or dangerous these various chemicals are (largely because they go untested and loosely regulated — even subsidized!), but there is now no question that they persist for generations, even thousands of years, and that they accumulate in the human body. The scientific evidence of microplastics in the human brain, the human heart, and human reproduction systems is now established beyond any reasonable doubt.
We lawyers study facts because we are responsible for ensuring evidentiary integrity in litigation — otherwise, we lose (embarrassingly). The facts of the IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) reports are easy to assess. IPCC’s reports do not claim the world is ending in 12 years, or even 50: they provide a range of possibilities for future outcomes based on a series of a priori assumptions about global warming, themselves dubious.
Yet assuming we humans are warming the globe, the current anthropogenic response takes us in the opposite direction if our goal is to save our earthly environment. I will here prove this unequivocally, beyond any possible shadow of doubt.
Renewables manufacturing — the proposed solution to the unproved warming hype — is without any question toxic. Lithium and cobalt mining, especially in the Democratic Republic of Congo and other less developed nations, is irrevocably toxifying vast swaths of soil, water, and human bodies with forever chemicals. Rubber tire dust is the main contributor to ocean microplastics: EVs increase tire wear by 30-40 percent. Silicon for solar panels, and EV aluminum, are mostly smelted in China using coal-fired plants. Plastic wind turbines and heat pumps join the pack of polluting industries touted as climate-saving, but which are without doubt climate-polluting in their manufacture.
All these chemical-spewing products end their lives in landfills or toxic storage. There is a lot of lobbyist money here to skew policies — that, too, is beyond any doubt.
The EPA has thus far identified 12,034 PFAS (perfluoroalkyl or polyfluoroalkyl substances) that potentially threaten human and ecosystem health. The Biden Administration has invested billions of borrowed funds in so-called “renewables” manufacturing but has not implemented any legislation to reduce or eliminate PFAS generation, only a multi-year plan to collect data about them.
Breaking the Climate Cult
What is beyond any reasonable doubt, and is both a legal and scientific conclusion, is that the manufacture of EVs, wind turbines, solar panels, and heat pumps all require the proliferation of massive amounts of these PFAS and other environmental toxins — without sequestering a single molecule of carbon.
Before Al Gore’s divisive Inconvenient Truth barrage, there was widespread bipartisan agreement that certain manmade chemicals could be harmful to wildlife, soils, water, and humans. The result of the shady climate cult shifting focus onto carbon dioxide and methane instead of PFAS, phthalates, and a myriad of endocrine disruptors, carcinogens, and obesity-causing toxins is that Americans are becoming sicker while industry profits on their borrowed renewables manufacturing tab.
It is beyond any reasonable doubt that renewables manufacturing is guilty as charged for toxifying our environment forever, an environment-polluting enterprise justified using sloppy ideological pseudo-science that has abandoned both the scientific method and any sense of logical proof.
Americans are waking up to the fraud of the climate cult. Make America Healthy Again is only achievable by pivoting to combat ubiquitous toxins in our food and ecosystem, and that cannot be accomplished while the toxic renewables spigot remains open full bore. Reduce toxic pollution, and greenhouse gases will be reduced in the bargain (including all that coal burned in the name of net-zero.)
America must aspire toward net-zero in forever chemicals, not the absurd, vapid illusion of net-zero carbon. This is now clear beyond any reasonable doubt.
READ MORE from John Klar:
More Cows Needed to Reverse Climate Change, Experts Say
AOC’s Leftist Sabotage Is Coming Home to Roost
Attorney-farmer John Klar hosts the Small Farm Republic Substack and podcast from his Vermont farm. His recent book is Small Farm Republic: Why Conservatives Must Embrace Local Agriculture, Reject Climate Alarmism, and Lead an Environmental Revival.
The post A Legal Anaylsis of Climate ‘Science’ appeared first on The American Spectator | USA News and Politics.