3 thoughts on “No court decision on climate rule before UN talks”

  1. In my highly biased opinion, the study of climate must be considered in units of time of not less that 1,000 years.

  2. I thought the Constitution made the legislative, executive, and judicial separate . It would seem that if the Constitution is to be obeyed, the court must rule against the climate decrees, legislation, and regulation. Article 1 starts out: “All legislative powers herein granted….”. Nowhere in the Constitution is there any grant of power to be involved in environmental matters, and it has not been amended to change that. Weather forecasting and learning about weather by the federal government was legal, when it was a part of the military. Also, why waste time and money on climate hot air, instead of climate fact. Science is supposed to be based on fact. Consensus is not automatically tied to fact.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.