Global warming made me do it!


Cleared: Jury decides that threat of global warming justifies breaking the law

By Michael McCarthy, Environment Editor
The Independent
Thursday, 11 September 2008

The threat of global warming is so great that campaigners were justified in causing more than L35,000 worth of damage to a coal-fired power station, a jury decided yesterday. In a verdict that will have shocked ministers and energy companies the jury at Maidstone Crown Court cleared six Greenpeace activists of criminal damage.

Jurors accepted defence arguments that the six had a "lawful excuse" to damage property at Kingsnorth power station in Kent to prevent even greater damage caused by climate change. The defence of "lawful excuse" under the Criminal Damage Act 1971 allows damage to be caused to property to prevent even greater damage -- such as breaking down the door of a burning house to tackle a fire.

The link to the rest of the story

I am not sure what the possible criminal penalty was, but at least those High Court injunctions seem to carry some weight. How does the removal of six letters from a chimney cost more than $19,000? Somehow this story reminds me of John Scopes.

As of today, L35,000 is actually more than $62,000. I, too, find it hard to believe that that figure would be justified by removing some paint from a chimney (or just painting over it?) I also agree that it sounds more like jury nullification than a true defense.

Step 1: Build a new coal plant.

Step 2: Brag about new coal plant in the Austin Chronic-le.

Step 3: Arrest Austin hippies who come to your town to vandalize said coal plant.

Step 4: Wait for defendants to subpoena Al Gore on necessity defense.

Gore urges civil disobedience

Never saw the famed movie....but how does he explain the ice ages and subsequent periods of global warming that ended THOSE ice ages?? I suppose the dinosaurs were belching out too much CO2 then...??

So, there's this alarming article declaring that the Artic Ice is at it's second lowest level ever. http://news.cnet.com/8301-17912_3-10043977-72.html

The implication being that the world is in a crisis and we're in serious trouble.

Read carefully though and in paragraph four of the article you'll find that while we're down 33% from "normal" this year, last year at this point we were down 39%.

So, between '07 and '08 there's been a 6% increase.

Umm, if more ice = better, isn't that indicative things getting better?

While global enviromental politics may be fairly important to discuss and understand, alarmists are ruining the conversation.