Most on The Left that obliviously and mind-reflexively support such nonsense lawsuits consider themselves intellectually and educationally superior to 'nut job religious fundamentalists'. Yet, by definition of how enslaved they are to obeying the crowd's dictum of climate-hysteria-as-fact, *they* are the ones who fit the definition of 'nut job religious fundamentalists', at least as far as the Scientific Process is concerned.
On the Science - which most are not really that interested in here - there is a delightful, truth-laden, little legal precedent nuclear bomb of logic that the defense in this case is likely to bring up. It might go something like this.
Q: "Do you believe in the Scientific Process?"
A: "Of course."
Q: "Then you believe that any claims asserted by anyone within Science must be repeatable by anyone, rather than simply claimed?"
A: "Of course."
Q: "Does anyone in the known universe have two planet earths, one with human beings inventing oil extraction from drilling and one not, and has measured the difference in overall global heat absorption and diffusion patterns directly resulting in an increase in surface temperature?"
A: "Well, that's absurd and not possible..."
Q: (Interrupts) "Yes or no please."
A: "You're making an absurd argument here!"
Q: "Am I? Or are you?"
A: "Such a scenario is not possible!"
Q: "So any conclusions by humanity as to the link between climate change and oil extraction and combustion must only be theoretical, and non empirical?"
A: Distinctly raised an in a higher-pitched voice now, since these kind of people aren't known for surrounding themselves with contesting opinions of their world view: "This is an absurd analysis! You could never have two planet earths like that to make such a comparison!"
Q: "So any claimed conclusions by humans are, at best, theoretical? And therefore driven and highly influenced by human motivations, such as politics or attraction to government grants or economic envy and greed over oil company revenues, rather than the known and provable physical realities of our universe?"
A: Extended silence. Then "There is an immense majority of Scientist who assert that the fundamentals of physics prove beyond any reasonable doubt..."
Q: (Interrupts) Each Scientist focusing on their own area of specialty, but not comprehensively?
A: "Excuse me"?
Q: This immense majority of Scientists you mention - do any of them know the entirety of all physical processes affecting global temperatures on Earth, or do they specialize in one or a few specific areas of atmospheric temperature diffusion?"
A: "Well, no one knows the details of the entire heat distribution physics of Earth, but..."
Q: *(Interrupts) "Thank you for your testimony."
Judge: "You may step down now."
A: "But this is absurd!!!!!"
Judge: "You may step down now."

Now I can finally sue all aircraft companies for their responsibility of the effects gravity whenever gravity causes harm or death.
I'm sure there will be no consequence to suing corporations to financial insolvency for issues they are not - could not - be the root cause of.
I'll just get my Professional Victimist claimant check and life will be good!

To be aware and acknowledge that the Earth's climate might be changing is reasonable.
This is primarily due to the fact that the Earth's climate is always changing.
Anyone insisting that the change is primarily due to human activity is deeply unreasonable, because that is simply not a provable fact, because no one has two planet earths, one with humans and one without, to make such an empirical determination.
Anyone insisting that they know human activity is primarily responsible for current changes is making assertions based on a mass amalgamation of very narrowly focused Science papers - which is quite incomplete - on the tens of thousands of interrelated thermal transfer processes of planet earth.
And then from making these assertions on paltry substance, the alarmists make declarations to themselves and others around them about what they now know "is fact".
Why would people behave like this?
Because it makes them feel good that "they care".
Because it makes them feel good that they can feed their ego with the emotional zeal of hatred so easily aimed at successful oil corporations.
But these feelings are effectively religious dogma in their minds, not empirically provable facts.
Ok, so why would people refuse to adapt their mindset on the topic when confronted with skepticism about the degree of anthropogenic effects on the climate?
Because they deeply fear having to suffer the abandonment of ideas they have clung on to for years of their lives; they would have to admit how wrong they have been for a very long time. Most people don't have the emotional strength to do this, even when confronted with empirical evidence.
It used to be that adventurers of the past looked at the challenges of weather and sea level changes as a fundamental tenet of existing in the universe; living life on planet Earth presents a challenge, accept it and be industrious to solve it, or face the peril of death.
In distinct contrast, many current climate alarmists are entirely unaware of their own arrogance as manifested in their baseline sense of entitlement to a world of perfect and unchanging climate. The Climate Alarmists may well not believe in a god, but they sure as hell know if it wasn’t for other people’s carbon emissions, their world would be comfortable and unchanging.
As a result they do extreme things to lash out at the ghosts in their minds, like religious zealots, glueing themselves to roads, destroying society's valuables, asserting false claims wrapped up in stupid human guilt whenever a tragic weather event occurs, and voting for political parties who almost always have a record of imposing policies that lower the quality of life for millions of people.
Compared to the hearty populations of the past, and some living less coiffed lifestyles in the present, these climate alarmists are men and women neutered from their own strength to see the challenges of life as a source of aspiration to solve and grow. These alarmists would rather sulk in sadness of the state of humanity, which soothes their self-tortured souls not much differently than an injection of heroin distracts and deadens the self-inflicted life pains of a junkie.
Also none of these concerns about carbon emissions will be on anyone’s list of concerns in a hundred years or so when nuclear fusion or beamed solar systems remove the bulk of combustion activity on planet earth.
The period of time of human oil combustion will be a brief blip during the growth of civilization, rather than a doom spiral of turning the Earth into Venus, as the Climate Alarmists are so absolutely sure of.
This is all distinctly disappointing when there is a real issue of pollution to address: the particulate pollution that is known to be causing lung cancer. Co2 is effectively aerobic plant fertilizer and should be mostly ignored. If one ‘cares about the environment’ there should be much more focus on reducing the particulate emissions of combustion, not Co2 emissions.
But particulate pollution turned out to be not nearly as effective a political manipulation topic as carbon emissions, so we’re all left in a world chasing a phantom problem while people die in great numbers by lung cancer.
Finally, within time-scales larger than one human life, wind storms like these are totally normal, and in fact routinely occuring.
If we were to - stupidly - assume all the worst of all Climate Alarmist Addicts, this would translate to maybe 1 or 2 more windstorms than the usual 10 per 200 years.
So to attribute this one wind storm's occurrence as proof of or derived from human caused climate change is a level of idiocy and mislead belief no different than humans have believed in extreme religious beliefs since the dawn of civilization.
This is rather ironic since Science actually grew out of a need for humanity to get past such firmly held beliefs that were simply not true.
When you read “...illustrating what experts describe as increasingly unpredictable weather extremes driven by climate change.” and you intellectually lap that up and then do nothing to combat the misinformation to others or yourself, you are actively making the world a worse place.

LOLOLOL.....

Just take the win, past tense as it might be: Meta helped the fraud of 2020. Enjoy it. And yes you're paying for it now.

Balance was always going to come.

This feels like a press release to spin upcoming revenue results being tanked as they find themselves squarely in the "Air America success story" domain.

First, it's ok - and good - and worthwhile - to care about and actually achieve tending to the environment responsibly.

However, to recommend decreasing humanity's growth due to a mass-delusional, totally unreasonable, politically motivated anxiety of human induced climate change, when the challenge is to grow humanity regardless of the universe's challenges to us all, is the extreme epitome of total and complete human idiocy.

Back to your death cult, functionally anti-progressive-under-the-fake-name-of-progressive mindset.

People who think like this are addicted to feeling superior to 'other people' by 'thinking against the grain' of common thought.

It's an addiction to mental laziness, an unwillingness to doing the hard mental work of critical thinking, as opposed to lapping up thinking orders from mainstream media and Hollywood.

There is no difference intellectually with these people's thinking and that of a screaming 3 year old when they realize they can't fly by moving their arms up and down quickly like they see in the movies, and the real world just crushes their unrealistic dreams.

Each and every one of these ninnies would let go of their need for alarmism if for some unexpected reason it came out the best way to cool the planet was to lower taxes, promote energy growth of all technologies, give the people of the third world air conditioning and heating, and maybe even have to suffer the god-awful crushing reality of the ocean sea levels going up a few inches for a few hundred years. OMG how will humanity survive that?


Grow up already.

Ah yes! Nothing revives a drug ridden crime ridden area than giving away apartments for free. That will attract *exactly* the kind of people we're looking for.

It's almost as if those excellent people in government ignored the actual problem in the first place!

Watching their vid, that landing was pretty hard; like brain damage inducing hard. Despite the 2/3 parachutes working, and despite the explosive detonation slowdown.

I can't wait to go to space on some kind of rocket; But I'm definately not going in a ship that lands like that.

Might as well crash my car into the closest wall and run around telling how good the view was until I got brain damage.

As a Californian, I log into my city's website.

In big red animated letters, today, it decrees 'Severe drought!'

In California today, we have had multiple massive storms in a relatively normal winter, with a resulting over-abundance of water.

#1 Because of this insane bs from all levels of government, no one with a brain trusts government messaging anymore.

#2 If there is EVER an *actual* 'water shortage' in the future, it will be because of ninny voters thinking 'Dams are Bad!' and then getting all bitchy about how 'California is running out of water'

Dams are awesome when run correctly.

I wish everyone at the LA Times suffered a world where California had no dams or water resevoirs, and no more damns in the future. So they could watch all that water in the winter go into the ocean, and watch their children (and millions more) die of heat death and dehydration because... you know, 'the planet'.

Water is literally the most renewable resource on the planet, but you have a entire political system forcing mental heroin into stupid voters to keep power by telling them 'Building new water resevoirs for the quality of life of the people is BAD'

People keep voting idiots like this into power, they're going to get the results of idiodic, power-craving, reality-denying politciians in power.

I'm really sorry Californians, but your cities are hellholes, your water infrastructure is falling apart, and your politicians prioritize the rights of non-californians, because.... that's what you keep asking for.

So, you're going to get what you asked for.

The current use of live coding exams during software engineering recruitment is as pointless and ineffective as the accounting firm's 'review' of collateralized mortgage debt in 2007; a farcical arms race of academia and ego where everyone is pretending to have accurate knowledge.

And there's a ticking time-bomb of consequences that shows up later.

Actually, it's worse than that.

These live coding exercises filter out the most knowledgeable employees, and also filter out all the engineers with performance anxiety... which is kinda common in the social group.

Live coding interviews have also devolved into hazing ceremonies; I've seen astoundingly arrogant and elitist behavior by interviewers.

If the actual job was that you walk in to the office and immediately get peppered with questions about esoteric engineering problems and you have to present the solution as a show-pony in front of other people, then they would be a legitimate interview process.

But that's not the job description for 99% of these jobs. So they are a completely illegitimate interview process.

Live coding reviews - though some are good at them - are a farcical exercise that wastes everyone's time and severely filter out extraordinarily capable and knowledgeable engineers and vastly reduces the size of the potential hiring pool for the employers.

I know multiple top tier software engineers who have made software supporting billions of dollars of revenue that have failed their live coding interview. Guess what, they went on to get hired by other companies that didn't require 2-3 months of useless live coding interview prep.

Look, if a hiring interviewer can't figure out I'm a professional software engineer with years of experience and aptitude by simply talking with me for about 30-60-120 minutes, than I don't want to work for that company. I work for firms that have been nimble and intelligent enough to not use pointless, poorly thought out interview techniques.

Also, the companies that do use these practices only end up hiring the type of people willing and able to get through this charade, and that has a massive cultural and knowledge-filtering effect.

Also, there's a massive security risk for all of these recorded live interviews.

I'm looking forward to the class action lawsuits of several varieties; that will be fun to watch.

... modern Electricity Generation Policy is logic-free.

Yes exactly!

Perfectly stated.

Also:
What imposes more destruction on the environment: a very temporary small percentage increase CO2 emissions with empirically unknown consequences in the future, or a mind virus of arrogance and entitlement combined with taking all societal progress for granted causing social rife, illogic, and misery on the scale of international warfare?

It will be a bit embarrassing a few decades from now, when nuclear fusion plants keep the world moving along, and with the temporary CO2 emissions of the recent few years easily absorbed by the biosphere, and nations like the UK will be noted in history classes as having totally unnecessarily committed economic self-castration purely to enable a class of fear-mongering political parties around world retain power by milking the desire of deeply uneducated and mislead people to feel good about themselves.

"Approaching them without shared knowledge can only slow down progress by creating competing systems for advancing and implementing solutions."

That has to be one of the more ignorant statements ever typed.

Ironic that it comes from people who assert interest in Science.

They're claiming to be interested in the process that reveals how the real world works, while simultaneously dismissing how the real world works.

Kinda sad, really.

Wait no! It's actually quite funny! Haaaaa ahahahahhahaaaaa a stupid stupid people.

As has been empirically demonstrated multiple times in the modern world, millions - billions? - will suffer quite a bit of misery two years from now from poor electrical service because of bad environmental polices and nimby-ism.

Only after the pain and suffering driven by these climate-alarmist addicts will nuclear power plants and proper grids be created.

It's extraordinarily sad to see the idealism of zealots crush true progress.

Threads = 2024 Equivalent of Air America Radio Network.
Nothing to do with financial sustainability, unless you want to dominate social media by selling cat food to lonely outraged women, or people of similar mental capabilities.
But.. some people *do* want to be spoon fed how to think.
Some people want to avoid hearing the difficult topics in life.
Some people wanted to be protected from free speech.
I guess there is a market for that, but you wouldn't catch me investing in it.