I was recently pre-fired from a job helping with the defense of a very large company in its fight over being charged with the same non-crime detailed below.
My point has nothing to do with myself, per se, but on the increasing difficulty, and even impossibility, of defending oneself from non-crimes when people like me are prevented from helping with the defense.
Which sounds confusing. Let me explain.
The non-crime is “climate attribution”. That somehow companies not publicly wringing their hands over “climate change” caused the public not to care, which in turn caused “climate change” to grow worse, which in turn caused “climate change” to cause bad weather.
Which in turn gave dark-souled unscrupulous midwits something to sue over.
I was “pre-fired” (and not for the first time), because the defense was concerned my thought-crimes unrelated to climate attribution studies would become the focus of any cross examination or deposition. Thought-crimes such as my public writings on covid, transgenderism, Equality, race, and so on. And thus all my cogent, and damning, arguments against climate attribution would be ignored.
The defense was sad about this, because they wanted me. And they wanted me because I am one of the only people making certain criticisms of climate attributions, and I can make them stick.
But this is politics and not science—science has scarcely anything to do with The Science today—and they were right not to hire me. (As sad as that is to my bottom line.)
I put this here in case somebody else who is involved in the defense against these kinds of ridiculous charges can benefit from reading (at least) my two papers on the subject, both found at the Global Warming Policy Foundation: “The Climate Blame Game: Are we really causing extreme weather?” and “How the IPCC Sees What Isn’t There“. The first in particular contains (what I think) are damning arguments to any attribution claim. See also this post (blog, Substack) for gross over-certainties in “climate change”.
One thought on “The Near Impossibility Of Defending Yourself Against Charges Of Climate Change”