Federal Judge Blocks Ridiculous, Key Component of Biden ‘Climate Change’ Scheme – Opinion

“Climate Change.” Let’s kick this sucker off with a trip down Global Warming Memory LaneWe will, please?

•  Al Gore ridiculously predicted in 2009: “The North Pole will be ice-free in the summer by 2013 because of man-made global warming.”

• A century and a half ago, United Nations Environment Director was first to claim the title.We had only 10 years to go, but the IPCC’s then head insisted that there were just five more years.

• The UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change in August 2021 released its latest climate report, leading Secretary-General António Guterres to histrionically call the findings a “code red for humanity,” and that “we can only avert catastrophe by acting in the next couple of months.”

• The following is from a noted climatologist who knows everything. Socialist Barbie™ Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-LOON), in January 2019: “We’re like… the world is gonna end in 12 years if we don’t address climate change.”

I don’t know whether or not “the world is gonna end” in “like” now, Neun yearsOr not. But I do know if you fact-check the crap above AOC’s ridiculous alarmist nonsense, you’ll find it’s all, yeah, crap. 

This brings us to Mumbling Joe Biden™ and his “vaunted” Climate Change Initiative.

Specifically, a United States District Court judge on Friday blocked Biden’s January 2021 executive order that ridiculously factored in the mostly-contrived “social cost” of carbon emissions when creating rules regulating pollution, as reported by Fox News.

So what is the “social cost” of the “existential threat to mankind,” you ask?  Let’s go to the inimitable Stanford EconomicsMarshall Burke is the professor who has the right answer.

For thinking about climate change, the most crucial number is the social cost of carbon. The atmosphere can retain carbon dioxide for some time and cause warming. This affects human outcomes. Carbon’s social cost is how much additional CO can cause to the environment.₂ has on outcomes, converted into dollars.

Given the left’s strict adherence to all things science — except when They ignore science to follow their political narrative (see: “all-things COVID”) — does the above explanation of “social cost” sound like exact science to you? Me, neither.

Anyway, Judge James Cain sided with Republican attorneys general from energy-producing states who rightly claimed Biden’s handlers’ attempt to Increase the cost estimateSo, what are you waiting for? Threatened to Increase energy costs and decrease state revenueFrom energy production.

An injunction was issued by the judge that prohibits the administration’s use of the more expensive estimate. This puts a dollar value to damages that are caused each additional ton of greenhouse gasses emitted into our atmosphere. Needless to say, the wise among us know exactly what happens to every “excess” tax dollar fleeced from hardworking Americans by the Democrat Party in one form or another: Redistribution of wealth

Cain’s ruling stated, as transcribed by Fox:

Plaintiff states have adequately identified the types of harms that warrant injunctive Relief.

Moreover, the Court finds that the Plaintiff States have made a clear showing of an injury-in-fact, and that such injury ‘cannot be undone through monetary remedies.

The Court agreed that both the public interest as well as balance of equity weigh strongly in favor of an injunction.

“Injury-in-fact,” as defined by the Cornell Law School Legal Information Institute:

The plaintiff must have suffered an “injury in fact,” meaning that the injury is of a legally protected interest which is (a) concrete and particularized and (b) actual or imminent.

The court must establish a causal relationship between the injury suffered and the misconduct brought to it.

The court must make it likely that the injured party will be compensated.

In other words, Joe, nice try — but no cigar.

Biden and his handlers could not be reached for immediate comment.

Let’s get to the bottom of it:

The quintessential question: Is “climate change” real? It is.

Earth’s climate has undergone changes — many or most of them cyclical — from its origin. There have been ice ages, and then there have been ice ages. They have come and gone again. There are many other examples. Is “man” responsible for Any changes to the world’s climate? Sure. To what extent? But to what extent? Not to mention, cataclysmic, “existential threat to our times” stuff?

Do you remember the Deepwater Horizon disaster? The Deepwater Horizon explosion and sinking in April 2010 caused the deaths of eleven workers and was the worst oil spillage in marine oil drilling history. We were told by climate loons that the Gulf of Mexico’s marine and plant life would almost cease to exist.

Twelve years later, what happened? Those “Armageddon-like predictions turn out?

You can Google it. As if you don’t already know the answer.

Incidentally, this was far from Team Biden’s first “existential threat” rodeo, of course.

Below are some highlights from RedState:

Build Back Better?’ The ‘Infrastructure’ Bill Was More ‘Climate Change’ Than Infrastructure

Blah-Blah, Climate Summits Worsen Global Warming Especially when Joe Biden Talks

Tornadoes and Emissions are all part of Climate Change: Biden Blows A Fuse

Joe Biden Sends Planeloads to Europe with Cabinet and Aides for Climate Change Combat