Clarification : The “#ExxonKnew” conspiracy claim has been dismissed. The lawsuits by the San Francisco & Oakland city governments against the oil companies have not been dismissed (yet).

Yesterday we reported that the “conspiracy” basis of the #ExxonKnew lawsuit was dimissed by the federal judge, who saw through the smoke and mirrors complaint created by Al Gore, Bill McKibben and NY attorney general Eric Schneiderman, and said there was no evidence of a conspiracy to hide information on risks of AGW from the public.

But, something bizarre happened Wednesday after the U.S. District Court for the District Northern California held a “tutorial” hearing on global warming science.

Chevron agreed with the latest scientific assessment from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s (IPCC), which was released in 2013 and 2014, the oil company’s lawyer said.

California cities, environmentalists and some scientists argued Chevron’s use of the IPCC’s latest assessment was misleading since it was outdated. Effectively, those seeking to punish oil companies are throwing aside the oft-touted “consensus” on climate science.

The irony was not lost on University of Colorado Professor Roger Pielke, Jr., who published peer-reviewed studies on climate science and policies.

This tweet indicates how much the climate debate has changed.

An oil company is invoking the IPCC consensus as their opponents, environmental activists (including some climate scientists), deny the IPCC consensus.

Bizzaro world!⬇️ https://t.co/M8lbeZHlQi — Roger Pielke Jr. (@RogerPielkeJr) March 21, 2018

That ruffled the feathers of some scientists and environmentalists, who immediately went on the offensive against Chevron, accusing the company of using the IPCC to discredit climate policies.

“Chevron’s lawyer plucked his strategy right from the climate-denier playbook,” environmental group the Center for Biological Diversity climate scientist Shaye Wolf told Earther.

Apparently, the “climate-denier playbook” includes citing the IPCC. Chevron agreed with the IPCC’s scientific assessment, while the company did not agree with policy proposals the international body suggests, the oil entity argued.

“He overemphasized and inflated narrow areas of uncertainty about global warming’s impacts. And he bobbed and weaved his way out of acknowledging the role of fossil fuels,” Wolf said.

…

Climate scientists Kate Marvel of NASA and Katharine Hayhoe of Texas Tech went on to argue the IPCC’s 2013 report was outdated and scientific studies in the years since have painted a more alarming picture of man-made warming.

We live in Interesting times.

More here.

Share this: Print

Email

Twitter

Facebook

Pinterest

LinkedIn

Reddit



Like this: Like Loading...