Memories of the 28th Century

It is possible to sue anyone for anything. Fortunately, the courts will dismiss many suits that are pointless, losers from day one. For example, there were the people on Lesbos who sued about the abuse of the term Lesbian. They got their hearing bur lost: https://www.reuters.com/article/us-g...00009920080722

I recall some farmers somewhere having sued NASA for having made holes in the firmament that resulted in excess rain, but I can’t find an article about that. The case was doomed from the beginning, because there is no firmament. That is similar to the case that brought this matter to mind. In Montana, some people are suing the state for having allowed climate change.
The courts will dismiss many suits that are pointless. “The case, filed against the state of Montana in 2020, alleges that the state has not upheld their constitutional obligation to a “clean and healthful environment” by investing in oil, gas, and coal development.” If I were Montana's attorney, then I would sit back and listen, because proving the assertion that I quoted would be impossible, unless one throws out the rules of logic and starts with a false premise.
https://www.ktvh.com/news/trial-begi...uit-in-montana
https://www.explorebigsky.com/judge-...to-trial/49040

A number of years ago, I worked in a town the has a Planning and Zoning Bylaw that stated that the Planning Board was responsible for providing adequate supplies of air. I laughed and suggested that some millions of years in the future, the Planning Board will have to put a dome around the town and collect air or make it up and pump it into the town. The ideas that any government can provide air and water or change the climate are inane, silly, absurd, and they do not belong in any law. But the idea of suing because the government is not doing those things is even more absurd.

My fear is that the court will take the suit seriously and not throw out the absurdities, and even worse, the State’s attorney might try to answer the absurdities. When an argument is based on false premises, the only real answer is to point out that the premises are false.

People have been putting forth assertions that human activity is causing climate change, but they have never shown proof of that. They make a number of claims but nothing that has been proven and nothing that would cause climate change. It’s as if King Canute was sued for damage caused by the tide coming in.

The more I look at the climate change campaign, the stranger it looks. At present, it appears that the Earth is about as warm as it was during the Medieval Warm Period, and not quite as warm as the Roman Warm Period. It is thought that barley was grown in Greenland during the Medieval Warm Period, but I have not seen anything about barley ripening in Greenland recently. https://sciencenordic.com/agricultur...enland/1447746

I won’t get worried warming climate, until it gets warmer than the Medieval and Roman Warm Periods. People have been pushing doom about climate for the last half century, and the predictions have all proven wrong, so far, and there is no sign that that will change. People love to worry, and climate change is something that they can’t do anything about, and it is not likely to be a problem. For the last several thousand years, sea level has risen and fallen, but it hasn’t changed much, and is little that humans can do about it anyway.

If the judge in the Montana case is smart, then he or she will listen to whatever will be presented and rule not proven, case dismissed. It won’t make any difference to most people, and the State of Montana won’t have to spend much money on it, so everyone should be happy.

People like to worry, and the best things to worry about are things that do not exist and are harmless, so climate change is ideal for worrying.
This post isn't about climate change; it is about how easily people are fooled and how difficult it is to change the mind of someone who has been fooled. Most people resent being shown that they made a mistake, and that has kept the anthropogenic climate change argument alive, even though it has been completely shredded. That set of claims is built on false premises, and the actual premises are known and demonstrable. But facts and logic don't do anything for true believers, and that collection of beliefs is more religious than scientific. Whenever any of their claims has been shown wrong, they