Leftists don't really care for the wide open spaces, fresh air and undisturbed wilderness that Alberta offers.
They prefer the concrete, smog and congestion that the cities offer.
Danielle Smith turns her back on Canada...
- Thread starter nottyboi
- Start date
They prefer the concrete, smog and congestion that the cities offer.
So now you have changed your stance to state that the Climate Change Deniers are always winning the lawsuits........Okay, finally you have agreed, though as a denier you believe that they are "bogus" climate change lawsuits!!
Dutch Shell, Australia and Norway have defeated
climate litigations and Canada with Guilbeault and
Wilkinson in charge will emerge victorius as well.
The cases of climate activists winning you can find
are insignificant. The verdicts handed down to
litigating younsters like saying their government had
the responsibilty to fight climate change were just to
make them feel good for being worthy graduates of
Greta Thunberg's school of attention whoring. The case
which Shell won in the end is stunning. The climate
litigators thought they could make shell halve emission
for real. Now Shell can just continue drilling for oil while
keeping its zero emission promise.
Rest assured real climate deniers' record in
climate ruling in court will continue to be one
of winning at the end.
Last edited:
Sour gas injuries in Alberta have included fatalities, lung damage, and nausea. Sour gas is a toxic gas that contains hydrogen sulfide (
H2Scap H sub 2 cap S
), which can be released during oil and natural gas work.
Fatalities
- 2018: A worker died from exposure to
H2Scap H sub 2 cap S
at an oil battery
- 2020: An operator died from exposure to
H2Scap H sub 2 cap S
at the Simonette Oil Battery
- 2011: A worker died from exposure to
H2Scap H sub 2 cap S
while working on a natural gas line near Fox Creek
- 2005: A 24-year-old man died in an explosion at an oil well near Brooks
I call all climate lawsuits bogus. Nonetheless some of those cases are
'not so bogus' as losing those case for the deniers could be potentially
perilous.
One such case is the lawsuit filed by a bunch of attention whoring teen
chicks against Australia. They actually won in the first ruling. The
verdict was worded in such a way that the government sued could find itself
in deep shit in the future. Hence the government appealed and won. Bogus
the lawsuit was the implication of the verdict could be detrimental to
the government. It was saying something to the effect the government
could be liable to compensation for future climate damage to today's
youth. The establishment would not allow young folks to win
in such a case in the end.
Another climate lawsuit in the making if it is not already filed is the
one pulled by Friends of the Earth in the Netherlands against the
ING Bank. It is of course another bogus lawsuit. Depending on what
their demand of FOE is. FOE may easily win if all they want is for ING to
acknowledge climate change. This is not likely what they want as
most leaders and those in positions of power and influence
of the entire world other than Donald Trump have at least refrained
from denial of climate change openly. But if FOE's objective is to force
ING to cease financing the oil and gas industry they most likely
would lose again like they already did with their attempt to force
Shell to zero emission of its energy product for real. The establishment
is all too happy to agree climate change is real but only if they
only have to pretend it is real.
