Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Wharf Rat who wrote (1079931)	7/24/2018 10:49:48 AM
From: Sdgla	1 Recommendation Recommended By TideGlider Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1578926

Water works well when dealing with fires. Also thinning the forests from fuel. Removing humans from the equation will not change anything wrt the temps/weather/climate. You and your dna being phased out, already far along in the process, will fix your rat made issue.

To: Wharf Rat who wrote (1079931)	7/24/2018 11:34:40 AM
From: Sdgla	1 Recommendation Recommended By TideGlider Respond to of 1578926

Another Climate Lawsuit Hits the Wall Power LinePower Line by Steven Hayward We reported here last month that a California lawsuit brought against major oil companies for their role in climate change was dismissed by a federal judge, and a different federal judge has today dismissed a similar suit brought by the city of New York. The judge, John Keenan, a Reagan appointee, ruled on similar grounds, namely, that climate change is not an issue suitable for remedy through litigation: The court recognizes that the city, and many other governmental entities around the United States and in other nations, will be forced to grapple with the harmful impacts of climate change in the coming decades. However, the immense and complicated problem of global warming requires a comprehensive solution that weighs the global benefits of fossil fuel use with the gravity of the impending harms. To litigate such an action for injuries from foreign greenhouse gas emissions in federal court would severely infringe upon the foreign-policy decisions that are squarely within the purview of the political branches of the U.S. government. The best part is the last paragraph: For the reasons stated above, the U.S.-based Defendants’ motion to dismiss is GRANTED and the City’s amended complaint is dismissed with prejudice in its entirety. This means the suit cannot be amended and filed again. When a case is dismissed “with prejudice,” it means “go away and don’t come back with this trash again.” Read the full 23-page opinion here, and go here for some background and additional news about the case.