Good day all. As anyone with an ounce of common sense knows, Global Warming is the biggest scientific fraud since Piltdown Man. Each year, global temperatures remain static, or in some cases, drop, and the acolytes of the Church of Global Warming become even more extreme in their views and ideas.
The latest really stupid idea comes out of London, England. A British lawyer thinks that it should be illegal for temperatures to go up beyond a certain point. Here are the moronic details from Breitbart:
Climate change is such a pressing, dangerous and universal threat that it should be made illegal under international law, a top barrister has told a conference of leading lawyers in London.
Philippe Sands QC, an international law specialist and Professor of Law at University College London, argued that the UN’s International Court of Justice (ICJ) should make it an “obligation under international law” to ensure that global temperatures never rise more than 2 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels.
God save us from European lawyers. They are just as delusional and destructive as our home grow ones.
This would follow the precedent of a landmark decision in June this year by a Dutch court as a result of a case brought by a green activist group – the Urgenda Foundation – against the Netherlands government. The court ruled that the government must reduce its greenhouse gas emissions by much more than it had intended – by at least 25 per cent by 2020, relative to 1990 levels – in order to prevent possibly dangerous climate change.
Never let it be said that judges let little things like science get in the way of one of their asinine rulings. If that decision stands, the Netherlands will be reduced to 4th world status, (Better known as living in caves), in very short order.
In its judgement the court referred repeatedly to the 2° C target, as if it were an article of holy writ, accepted by all, disputed by no one.
Holy writ is right. These idiots literally are a threat to the human race.
Sands told his audience of leading judges, lawyers and legal academics from 11 nations that the time was now ripe for such legislation to be adopted at the international level:
Oh this should be good.
The ICJ too could play a role in relation to that target, one based on science. It could be asked to confirm, for example, that the 2 degrees Celsius target now reflects an obligation under international law, and that its implementation imposes obligations to reduce emissions, including if necessary by phasing out altogether certain emissions of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases.
In addressing such an opinion, there is also no reason why the Court could not, within its rules of procedure, open up the process, allowing not only states and international organisations, but also other actors who are stakeholders, including corporations and NGOs, to participate by some effective means. There is nothing in the Court’s rules to preclude it from doing that, especially if the General Assembly so requested.
[youtuber youtube=’http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gbp_JQ7RxqM’]
Were Philippe Sands’s recommendation to be adopted it would inevitably generate billions of dollars of work for international lawyers like Philippe Sands.
Ah HAH! The penny drops! Literally.
[youtuber youtube=’http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GXE_n2q08Yw’]
It’s all about the money. Money for the lawyers of course. For the so called “Greens” it’s all about ending modern civilization.
Even more damagingly, though, it would more or less toll the death knell of Western industrial civilization – allowing any number of green activist bodies (“actors who are stakeholders”, as Sands calls them) to launch many thousands of vexatious, costly, and sclerosis-inducing law suits against any corporation or government deemed to be producing excess quantities of CO2. Which is to say, potentially, every government and business interest on the planet.
I would love to see these idiots trying to go after a few nations like, oh North Korea or Iran. Of course they won’t even try. Why? Personal survival. That doesn’t mean they won’t try and ram it through the United Nations and the World Court.
It’s possible, of course, that not even the UN would pass legislation quite so stupid.
No, they are that stupid, but it doesn’t matter. No one would pay any attention to their pronouncements, and frankly, if the UN tried to impose this on the United States?
But the precedent of the Dutch court’s ruling – now being challenged on appeal by the Netherlands government – does not augur well. What it shows – if there were ever any doubt about this – is that the judiciary can be just as gullible, ignorant and susceptible to Appeals to Authority as any other category of vaguely sentient human. If a Dutch court can reach so fatuous a decision, why not a UN one too?
Why not indeed? One reason would be trying to actually enforce something that asinine. In the United States, if Congress or the courts allowed this to go through, well, the phrase “Tar, feathers, rope. Assembly required” might stop being just a phrase people use. But we’re a long, long way from that point and probably will never reach it. Still, how did these idiots come up with this 2 degrees centigrade deal anyway? Basically, they pulled it out of their collectivist asses of course.
That target, they clearly aren’t aware, has no serious scientific basis. It was the invention of one man – German left-wing activist Hans Joachim Schellnhuber, director of the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research (PIK) – who himself admits that he plucked the figure from the air for political reasons at the height of the climate scare in the mid-1990s.
Well why not? It isn’t as though any real science is being conducted into Global Warming. It’s a religion, nothing more, and probably even more destructive than Islam.
“Two degrees is not a magical limit — it’s clearly a political goal,” says Hans Joachim Schellnhuber, director of the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research (PIK). “The world will not come to an end right away in the event of stronger warming, nor are we definitely saved if warming is not as significant. The reality, of course, is much more complicated.”
The “Reality” is not complicated at all. There is no such thing as “Global Warming.” The climate is always changing. It’s been a lot warmer in the past globally, and a lot colder as well. In about 10-15 thousand years, the Earth will once again be in the depths of a global ice age. People in the future will probably want some of that “Global Warming” these fools keep barking about.
If these moonbats were to actually get their way, we would see the following:
The end of the technology based society we now have. That means no more cars, planes, Ipads, Iphones or electricity. It would also mean no more modern farming techniques. It would be back to the ox drawn plow for farmers with a massive drop in food production. That would lead to mass starvation and death. When people start getting hungry, they will do whatever it takes to find food. This means global war.
I would say that if these barking moonbats got their way, we would see most of the human race die. Of course, these Malthusians want most of the human race destroyed. As long as the “Correct” people survive, of course, then let’s get this genocide going! And they thought the Nazi’s were the epitome of absolute pure evil. The followers of the Church of Global Warming have them beat in potential by a country mile.
Thatisall
~The Angry Webmaster~
[yasr_visitor_votes size=”medium”]
