Photogenic teens sue US government, part 2

Another in the long disappearing-up-my-own-arse series. Photogenic teens sue US government refers, of course, but so does U.S. fossil fuel groups pull out of climate change court case (via, and I’m sure you wanted to know this, C on Twitter). To whom I’m indebted for The money quote: “But discord arose among them after a judge ordered them to submit a joint filing stating their views on climate science.” Which is glorious, and reflects the obvious and often-stated: that the denialists only real position is denial; they have no concrete worldview to put in its place; no coherent theory of their own, other than “the IPCC is wrong and Al Gore is phat”. Which doubtless sounds great down a bar but isn’t terribly impressive when a judge asks you to state your views.

Need I say more? I hope you like the cartoon. You could have had a picture of my wisteria but I decided you’d prefer the coldness.

Advertisements

14 thoughts on “Photogenic teens sue US government, part 2”

  1. Another in the long disappearing-up-my-own-*rse series.?
    Good Sir, this ScienceBlogs site is a respectable establishment. Please comport yourself accordingly.

    Like

  2. “Phat” seems to mean something different on your side of the pond.

    [It looks like I’m not as hip as I thought I was… -W]

    Like

  3. “NAM spokeswoman Jennifer Drogus said the group had reevaluated its need to fight on behalf of the industry following the 2016 U.S. elections.”

    Meaning (a) they don’t need to intervene (now) because they’re sure the current administration will represent their interests, and (b) they don’t want to tie the US AG’s hands by staking out a less extreme position than the gov.

    One risk for them is if the suit drags on for more than four years…

    [I think you can expect them to throw out various spurious explanations; we will never know which is the true one -W]

    Like

  4. I know one of the teens personally, and beyond your back-handed compliment of “photogenic”, they are actually very well informed and eloquent; far more eloquent than your insulting and rambling piece will let on. These kids are fighting for a livable climate, hence, their lives and they know it. I had the honor of walking for and with one of these young people on the cross country Great March for Climate Action. Here is Kelsey Juliana, in her own words, defending a future that she knows the fossil fuel industry wants to deprive her and her cohort of: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O0i5OkjxjKQ
    So, how about you swallow some of your privilege and condescension and offer the real argument they are giving voice to?

    [If you or she write down her words I’ll be happy to read them. But I find listening to youtube rather uninteresting and slow. The arguements you’ve expressed I don’t find plausible. If she was indeed fighting for her life – which I don’t think is true, she has quite enough priv of her own to survive any climate trouble to come – then the fossil fuel industry would be stuffed, too -W]

    Like

  5. Thank you for your response. The video is from a Bill Moyers interview and it’s of a better quality than most YouTube fare. It’s worth watching, if not for you, then for the sake of your readers. Our only hope is in the young people. They are more sensitive to the kind of world that’s coming, locomotive style, down the line.

    [I think that is nonsense. What people usually mean when they say that kind of thing is that youbg folk are more malleable and more easily swayed to your views -W]

    They are the generation that can actively change it and I see this as part of a much needed ’take charge’ attitude. We ‘adults’ have done a dismal job of it. The organization is Our Children’s Trust, (https://www.ourchildrenstrust.org) and I hope they sue the shit out of this administration and the fossil fools who bought it. I really do.

    Like

  6. If she was indeed fighting for her life – which I don’t think is true, she has quite enough priv of her own to survive any climate trouble to come…

    I wouldn’t be too sure of that, given the damage that’s already been done.

    Like

  7. Speaking of coldness…

    This is the rather cool result of some very chilling tactics.

    Better street cred than photogenic teens, even.

    Like

  8. >> Our only hope is in the young people….

    > [I think that is nonsense. What people usually mean when
    > they say that kind of thing is that youbg folk are more
    > malleable and more easily swayed to your views -W]

    You missed the Sixties, right? Look where the USA thought it was headed in the Fifties, til the youngsters went off-plan.

    Like

  9. Those who do not remember the 1950s may be doomed to repeat them?

    “… The SAC target list, compiled in 1956 and published as part of a 1959 nuclear weapons planning study, deliberately included civilian populations.

    “The SAC plan specified “the ‘systematic destruction’ of Soviet bloc urban-industrial targets that specifically and explicitly targeted ‘population’ in all cities, including Beijing, Moscow, Leningrad, East Berlin, and Warsaw” …”

    http://nsarchive.gwu.edu/nukevault/ebb538-Cold-War-Nuclear-Target-List-Declassified-First-Ever/

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s