March 30, 2019

Toronto city councillor abusing taxpayers with “no hope” lawsuit against Big Oil

David MenziesMission Specialist

The virtue-signalling left’s favourite tactic in the fight against climate change has mostly been to implement taxation schemes but as the idea of a carbon tax becomes passé, climate crusaders are embracing a new form of warfare — litigation.

Toronto city councillor Mike Layton, son of the late socialist NDP leader Jack Layton, is advocating that Toronto should follow in the footsteps of other municipalities and sue major oil companies.

Layton Junior thinks the City of Toronto has a solid case against the oil industry for the billions of dollars in extra costs he alleges the city will incur in the decades ahead due to floods and storms caused by climate change.

And who’s responsible for climate change? Well, that would be that deep-pocketed boogie man known as Big Oil, says Layton.

Layton told the Globe and Mail that he’s a firm believer in the notion that polluters should pay, but if that’s the case then the City of Toronto should be suing... the City of Toronto because the city’s infrastructure is well past its best-before date.

The stress on the city’s aging infrastructure is a problem that’s been ignored by city fathers for decades.

This is really scary stuff for Toronto taxpayers. Such a lawsuit is a no-hoper, as I’ll explain.

If the lawsuit moves ahead, it will be funded by taxpayers, and when the city inevitably loses and has to pay the legal fees of the various oil companies, that will be funded by taxpayers too.

Can you say “boondoggle” – in which the only winners are the law firms?

Comments
You must be logged in to comment. Click here to log in.
commented 2019-04-02 13:15:26 -0400
“Hyacinth commented 1 day ago
LMAO @ Stephenson

Big fail, not even a C- for effort. Try again. "

Oddly, you seem unable to refute this purported C- effort.

" The point being:- Today’s UN “Global Warming Scam” is indeed one of the most blatant scams perpetuated on humanity in spite of modern scientific evidence to the contrary!… "

The weakening of the solar cycles coincided with the ‘little ice age" and (sliightly – a part per thousand or so) declining solar output. Concurrently the planet’s orbit is becoming more elliptical again, which reduces total solar energy input (it spends more time further away from the sun) The last minimum was very deep and the current one so far rivals it, whilst the last maximum was one of the weakest on record. Yet, the climate warms.

“Love it! “ixnixblixclkix” is Ms. Stephenson’s reply and apparently the Sun has nothing to do with it???…. Solar 11.2 year cycle activity has nothing to do with it?… You’re really, really straining at reality on that one Ms. Stephenson… "’

Solar influx is declining, slightly. Planet is warming. Discrepancy remains unexplained. Perhaps the atmosphere’s getting better at holding heat?

“Harley McCartney commented 1 day ago
So its the angle of the solar panels. The intensity of the sun is the same summer and winter. Where did you source that data Andrew?”

Seasons are purely the result of axial tilt, not solar intensity. The same radiation is there, just spread over a larger area. If your panel faces the sun directly, it will receive roughly the same amount of energy no matter the season (it actually gets a bit more because the earths’ closer to the sun in winter, although a low sun goes through more atmosphere as well)
commented 2019-04-02 13:06:55 -0400
“Al Peterson commented 1 day ago
ANDREW STEPHENSON
The climate is changing. Why?
——————————————
Because there has always been climate change. At one time the north was tropical. At one time not so long ago Greenland was green- hence the name. There are sea shells in the Great Sandhills of Saskatchewan. Under the retreating glaciers are ancient forests. There are fossilized palm trees on Vancouver island. Something big must hav happened before we ever burned a gallon of gas. "

You missed the point where those forests grew near the equator? It’s literally in one of your quotes. The continents have moved, after all. Same reason why there’s coal in Antarctica. In the Carboniferous, it was equatorial.

I’ve had a chance to play with wood from the Canadian arctic. Kind of neat. It’s actual wood, not petrified, that’s tens of millions of years old.

“Mike Krchnak commented 1 day ago
Well…..once again i feel a bunch dumber after reading all knowing andrews rhetoric. So let me some this up, today it was light and tonight its dark, and a couple of months ago it was friggin cold and now its pleasant.
We need to do something drastic to not let this happen any longer…….lets see…..I know, lets put a tax on the sunshine because it makes it light out and warms things up. And if it gets hot, more tax to cool us down. "

Bit of snow on the ground in Winnipeg this morning. Clearly the scientists are lying about the possibility of summer.
commented 2019-04-01 10:21:57 -0400
Yes, Andy GW is a scam. It os just another means to allow Neo-Marxists to control; people. This is how they convince so many people that the carbon tax will actually make a difference.

“Sometimes your freedom is not taken away at gunpoint but instead is done one piece of paper at a time, one seemingly meaningless rule at a time, one small silencing at a time”.

Aramando Valladares
Cuban Prisoner for 22 Years.
commented 2019-04-01 10:09:44 -0400
So its the angle of the solar panels. The intensity of the sun is the same summer and winter. Where did you source that data Andrew?
Twenty four hour daylight in summer negates the need for solar powered lights.
Batteries do not work as well in the cold no matter what type.
The experimental electric plane came up short of its destination one half hour away.
In a recent flight the head winds caused a forced landing in a field. Its range was not as stated.and flew for thirty minutes.
commented 2019-04-01 03:58:11 -0400
As I have posted several times over the previous past years… The Bible says “The sun also rises”… Yes, it surely does, thank God, and we all take life and comfort from that…. But that does not mean the Sun is a “constant” source of radiation on Earth’s face and NEVER HAS BEEN! It is the LARGEST input of energy, hence influence, on Earth’s climate, or LACK thereof" but goes through approximately 11.2 year “cycles” where its activity via solar coronal ejections waxes and vanes… It has been EVER THUS!… For “reasons unknown to man” the Sun, also historically, and as recorded, goes through several such “back to back” cycles of “quietude” when there are infrequent or none of such ejections… This was last witnessed in the Middle Ages when Europeans shivered in the winter’s cold and the Thames River froze over year after year… To say nothing of the fate of the Scandinavians and Siberians shivering in the cold for decades!… Read up on THE MAUNDER MINIMUM which is scientific fact… Recent Solar Cycle 24 deepened into now present Cycle 25 of little solar activity… Various solar observatories around the world have already noted this, observed this, and predicated this… The point being:- Today’s UN “Global Warming Scam” is indeed one of the most blatant scams perpetuated on humanity in spite of modern scientific evidence to the contrary!…
commented 2019-04-01 01:59:12 -0400
“The climate is changing. Why? There’s no known natural cause underlying it (the natural processes suggest slow cooling, with an unperturbed climate due a glaciated period in the next few thousand years), and the muckraking fails to provide an alternative model.”… Love it! “ixnixblixclkix” is Ms. Stephenson’s reply and apparently the Sun has nothing to do with it???…. Solar 11.2 year cycle activity has nothing to do with it?… You’re really, really straining at reality on that one Ms. Stephenson…
commented 2019-04-01 00:47:59 -0400
Well…..once again i feel a bunch dumber after reading all knowing andrews rhetoric. So let me some this up, today it was light and tonight its dark, and a couple of months ago it was friggin cold and now its pleasant.
We need to do something drastic to not let this happen any longer…….lets see…..I know, lets put a tax on the sunshine because it makes it light out and warms things up. And if it gets hot, more tax to cool us down.

Al Peterson…those facts are not the real facts because all knowing andrew is not copy and pasting them from who knows where.
Mostly, they don’t fit the all knowing ones narrative.
Thanks for the links, great information.
commented 2019-03-31 23:20:27 -0400
ANDREW STEPHENSON
The climate is changing. Why?
-——————————————-
Because there has always been climate change. At one time the north was tropical. At one time not so long ago Greenland was green- hence the name. There are sea shells in the Great Sandhills of Saskatchewan. Under the retreating glaciers are ancient forests. There are fossilized palm trees on Vancouver island. Something big must hav happened before we ever burned a gallon of gas.


A tropical forest densely packed with 12-foot-tall trees with flared trunks and curved branches of needle leaves — Dr. Seuss would have felt right at home — covered an area near the equator some 380 million years ago. Scientists spotted the fossilized stumps a long way from this location — in Arctic Norway.

https://www.livescience.com/52868-fossil-forests-norway.html


But DNA extracted from the previously ignored dirty bottom has revealed that Greenland was not only green, it boasted boreal forests like those found in Canada and Scandinavia today.
Biologist Eske Willerslev of the University of Copenhagen and an international team of colleagues discovered DNA from alder, spruce, pine and yew trees at the glacier’s base as well as insects ranging from butterflies to spiders. This is the “first evidence for a forested southern Greenland,” Willerslev says. And based on the tree species found, Greenland must have been warmer than 50 degrees Fahrenheit (10 degrees Celsius) in summer and never colder than one degree F (–17 degrees C) in winter, much warmer than present conditions.

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/proof-on-ice-southern-greenland-green-earth-warmer/


In the last 12,000 years or so, the climate of the Palliser Triangle has ranged from warm to cold and from moist to dry. More than 13,000 years ago, the climate of the Triangle began to warm up, and by 10,000 years ago, the temperatures were similar to what we experience today. A warm and moist climate led to an increase in plant cover and soil formation. As warming continued, the effective precipitation decreased, and plant cover decreased as well. This long period of drought lasted from about 9000 to 5000 years ago. At this time, rivers were shallower and warmer than they are today. The climate began to cool about 5000 years ago, and the modern plant communities started to form. About 3000 years ago, warming began again and continued until modern times.30

http://www.seawa.ca/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/SEAWA-Watershed-Report-2009-1-Geography.pdf
commented 2019-03-31 21:06:56 -0400
Motley Trolls blowing hot air is the real cause of global warming.
commented 2019-03-31 19:16:11 -0400
LMAO @ Stephenson

Big fail, not even a C- for effort. Try again.
commented 2019-03-31 19:02:39 -0400
By the way, since you’re likely to ask, the Natural News Now page appears to be paying attention to extremes, not averages, which is to say overinterpreting noise, in essence, saying that the fastest speeder on the 401 30 years ago got caught doing 160, while they caught someone doing 185 last week so the 401 must be moving better now than then. Obviously wrong, and that’s why we use averages rather than extremes.

The 1998 point was preliminary data that was revised later, and who knows about the 1935 one, but it doesn’t actually change the big picture, maybe the standard deviation a bit – the trend remains the same and the 5 year averages overlay perfectly – the regression (~line of best fit) has a positive slope in both.
commented 2019-03-31 18:49:37 -0400
Sea levels are rising and things like glacial flow patterns changing (either melting outright, or in a few cases slipping faster as the ice softens and under weight of increased precipitation).. This easily observed data suggests the climate is changing, which refutes the “fudged data” argument.

The climate is changing. Why? There’s no known natural cause underlying it (the natural processes suggest slow cooling, with an unperturbed climate due a glaciated period in the next few thousand years), and the muckraking fails to provide an alternative model.

I don’t care for conspiracies. I’m interested in data, not what your climate expert who isn’t tells you to think.
commented 2019-03-31 17:58:43 -0400
Jill and John Ward.. I always read your comments.. no matter if it’s in upper or lower case form.. It’s the content that matters.
commented 2019-03-31 16:16:35 -0400
Thanks for the facts Hyacinth..:)
commented 2019-03-31 16:15:09 -0400
No more troll- where did it go,maybe it had to catch a flight on its rubber band powered airplane to Venezuela ?
commented 2019-03-31 16:08:26 -0400
Overpopulation will do more harm to the planet than a change in climate,but we know climate change is a pre designed government hoax to collect more taxes and to eventually cull people into large cities.
commented 2019-03-31 16:01:42 -0400
“I don’t need the government or the media (mainstream or alternative) to think for me. I get the science straight from the source. It’s real, friend. I know that that makes you very upse (e.g., your hissing and spitting downthread) given that denying it has become a right wing virtue-signal, but eventually you’ll come to terms with it. "

🤣 ROFL
commented 2019-03-31 15:58:48 -0400
www.naturalnews.com/045695_global_warming_fabricated_data_scientific_fraud.html
“… in what might be the largest scientific fraud ever uncovered, NASA and the NOAA have been caught red-handed altering historical temperature data to produce a “climate change narrative” that defies reality. This finding, originally documented on the Real Science website, is detailed here. We now know that historical temperature data for the continental United States were deliberately altered by NASA and NOAA scientists in a politically-motivated attempt to rewrite history and claim global warming is causing U.S. temperatures to trend upward. The data actually show that we are in a cooling trend, not a warming trend (see charts below). This story is starting to break worldwide right now across the media, with The Telegraph now reporting (1), "NOAA’s US Historical Climatology Network (USHCN) has been ‘adjusting’ its record by replacing real temperatures with data ‘fabricated’ by computer models. Because the actual historical temperature record doesn’t fit the frenzied, doomsday narrative of global warming being fronted today on the political stage, the data were simply altered using “computer models” and then published as fact…."
commented 2019-03-31 15:58:15 -0400
www.express.co.uk/news/clarifications-corrections/526191/Climate-change-is-a-lie-global-warming-not-real-claims-weather-channel-founder
“… There is no significant man-made global warming at this time, there has been none in the past and there is no reason to fear any in the future.
“Efforts to prove the theory that carbon dioxide is a significant greenhouse gas and pollutant causing significant warming or weather effects have failed. “There has been no warming over 18 years.” …Climate expert William Happer, from Princeton University, supported Mr Coleman’s claims. He added: "No chemical compound in the atmosphere has a worse reputation than CO2, thanks to the single-minded demonisation of this natural and essential atmospheric gas by advocates of government control and energy production. “The incredible list of supposed horrors that increasing carbon dioxide will bring the world is pure belief disguised as science.” The 2010 InterAcademy Council review was launched after the IPCC’s hugely embarrassing 2007 benchmark climate change report, which contained exaggerated and false claims that Himalayan glaciers could melt by 2035. ""
commented 2019-03-31 15:57:14 -0400
The second and most shocking revelation of the leaked documents is how they show the scientists trying to manipulate data through their tortuous computer programmes, always to point in only the one desired direction – to lower past temperatures and to “adjust” recent temperatures upwards, in order to convey the impression of an accelerated warming. This comes up so often (not least in the documents relating to computer data in the Harry Read Me file) that it becomes the most disturbing single element of the entire story. This is what Mr McIntyre caught Dr Hansen doing with his GISS temperature record last year (after which Hansen was forced to revise his record), and two further shocking examples have now come to light from Australia and New Zealand.
In each of these countries it has been possible for local scientists to compare the official temperature record with the original data on which it was supposedly based. In each case it is clear that the same trick has been played – to turn an essentially flat temperature chart into a graph which shows temperatures steadily rising. And in each case this manipulation was carried out under the influence of the CRU. …"

www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/columnists/christopherbooker/6679082/Climate-change-this-is-the-worst-scientific-scandal-of-our-generation.html
commented 2019-03-31 15:52:34 -0400
Hyacinth: exactly this guy is hilarious,it’s kinda fun poking the troll on a Sunday!!!
commented 2019-03-31 15:46:02 -0400
The troll wrote – "I don’t need the government or the media (mainstream or alternative) to think for me. I get the science straight from the source. It’s real, friend. I know that that makes you very upse (e.g., your hissing and spitting downthread) given that denying it has become a right wing virtue-signal, but eventually you’ll come to terms with it. "

LMAO, now that is rich LOL, stop, seriously, you should really enter show business for you have a knack for comedy but no head for reality!!
commented 2019-03-31 15:42:31 -0400
I get the science right from the source-oh really from the government’s science sources right Andrew.Keep drinking the koolaid you aren’t a free thinker,you’ve been manipulated.
commented 2019-03-31 15:33:11 -0400
Andrew S. did you miss this question?…
Robert Greeley commented 18 hours ago
What do you think the ratio would be? Time for a real change is needed. It’s not the Tax Payor that has to scrounge and adapt… It’s the Politician’s that has to change and adapt. You all owe us Tax Payer’s a ton load of cash… Years of ripping us off is about to be exposed. Courtesy of Human Beings like Mr. President Trump.

I think the Tax Payor should start to tax the politicians.. Lets start to gouge their pay cheques… I think we could be fair with the negotiations.. after all it’s 2019.. Budgets balance themselves right?

Andrew S. .. what are your thoughts on my comments above?
commented 2019-03-31 15:27:41 -0400
Good find Jan G..
Jan G commented 15 hours ago
This is it!
This is how Canada’s climate change should be addressed.
This is how the US addresses it in Congress…………finally, someone with some common sense and real solutions.

ABSOLUTE MUST WATCH:
(Mark Dice) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3nB7oaYJHWo&feature=em-uploademail
commented 2019-03-31 15:07:00 -0400
“Sheldon Eisler commented 1 hour ago
ASS syndrome
Andrew Stephenson Stupidity
Get back to us when you feel you can present a logical conversation,up until now you spew pure drivel.You exemplify the three pillars of Leftism. "

Tell me what’s not logical, and why you feel that way. Let’s see if we can work something out, friend.

What’s a "pillar of leftiedom? Is that one of those generalization-based strawmen that people like when they can’t actually refute the comment at hand?
commented 2019-03-31 15:05:53 -0400
“Sheldon Eisler commented 30 mins ago
Hey Andrew climate change is a big sham are you upset because you fell for it ,how does it feel knowing that your government manipulated you along with the UN? "

I don’t need the government or the media (mainstream or alternative) to think for me. I get the science straight from the source.

It’s real, friend. I know that that makes you very upse (e.g., your hissing and spitting downthread) given that denying it has become a right wing virtue-signal, but eventually you’ll come to terms with it.
commented 2019-03-31 14:33:40 -0400
Hey Andrew climate change is a big sham are you upset because you fell for it ,how does it feel knowing that your government manipulated you along with the UN?
commented 2019-03-31 14:23:36 -0400
LMAO @ Stephenson

Big fail, not even a C- for effort. Try again.
commented 2019-03-31 14:20:07 -0400
ASS syndrome
Andrew Stephenson Stupidity
Get back to us when you feel you can present a logical conversation,up until now you spew pure drivel.You exemplify the three pillars of Leftism.