‘We Are Not Learning’: Bjorn Lomborg Says Politicians Hide Behind Climate Change To Duck ‘Responsibility’ For ‘Failures’

Bjorn Lomborg said Friday that politicians were blaming climate change for disasters like the wildfires on Maui to duck “responsibility” for “failures” in addressing them.

Democratic Gov. Josh Green of Hawaii blamed climate change for the deadly wildfire that destroyed many buildings in the town of Lahaina, killing at least 96 people as of Monday, according to the New York Times. The West Maui Land Company accused M. Kaleo Manuel, an official with the Hawaii Department of Land and Natural Resources (DLNR), of delaying a response to a request to use water to refill reservoirs used by the Maui Fire Department to fight the wildfire, Hawaii News Now reported.

WATCH:

“You maybe shouldn’t have a lot of grasses that will just burn a lot. You should adopt better building codes, not what Governor Green did, namely put it on hold because he wants cheaper buildings and you shouldn’t just have one exit road, you should have better firebreaks,” Lomborg told “America Reports” co-anchor John Roberts. “And possibly the most important thing is, you should inform people. You should not have a guy that actually decides not to run the alarm because he worries that people might misunderstand it. Most people weren’t informed.”

“And this is the crucial bit when you talk about climate change: When everybody blames climate, which is a very, very small part of the whole puzzle, you take away responsibility from all these failures,” Lomborg added. “And that’s, of course, what you really need to focus on if you are going to avoid the next fire.”

Herman Andaya, the director of the Maui Emergency Management Agency, resigned Thursday after the agency came under fire for not activating emergency sirens to warn people of the fires. The state reportedly bogged down an effort to improve electric infrastructure that would have addressed overgrown non-native grass, according to the Wall Street Journal, one of a series of decisions that may have worsened the severity of...

Visage à trois #1632

Three Videos For Your Viewing Pleasure:

Three Additional Bonus Videos:

Quick Hits Of Wisdom, Knowledge And Snark #1287

 

Quick Hits Of Wisdom, Knowledge And Snark #1285

Visage à trois #1631

Three Videos For Your Viewing Pleasure:

Three Additional Bonus Videos:

Quick Hits Of Wisdom, Knowledge And Snark #1286

Quick Hits Of Wisdom, Knowledge And Snark #1285

The Corrupt DoJ has Charged Trump with a Fake Crime

“It’s like murdering babies!”

So said one lawyer defending the latest federal indictment of President Trump against the charge that it seeks to throw Trump in jail for exercising his First Amendment rights. Many legal experts argue that an indictment for criminal conspiracy cannot just be about First Amendment-protected activity. Others argue that a conspiracy may include all sorts of legally protected activity, like purchasing knives or driving to the scene of a crime, but conspiracy to murder babies is a crime because murder is a crime.

The anti-indictment experts are right. The others miss the point.

First, the legal basics: a standard criminal conspiracy comprises two parts: (1) an agreement among conspirators (2) to accomplish a criminal object. For any conspirator to be liable for a criminal conspiracy, at least one must also (3) commit an “overt act” -- that is, do something -- for the purpose of accomplishing the criminal end. The overt act need not be a crime in itself, and the criminal object need not ever have been accomplished.

You can’t be indicted without specific facts alleged. You can’t be sent to trial on an indictment that just says “you violated such and such federal law.” The indictment must say how. So a conspiracy indictment must do more than merely list a provision of a criminal statute as the object of a conspiracy. It must identify a specific result intended by the conspirators that is a crime.

So if the indictment alleges an agreement to murder babies at the Blackacre nursery, we imagine that a conspirator entered the nursery and murdered the babies. Would he have violated the murder statute? Yes. Is the conspiracy allegation thus sufficient? Yes.

As if by turning a dial, we figure out which act is the one that would push the intended result over the line into a crime. To zero in on exactly what is the alleged criminal object of the conspiracy, we imagine other results and ask the same questions.

Imagine that the conspirators knocked on the door of the Blackacre nursery. Would that have been a crime? No. Can a conspiracy indictment allege only that the conspirators agreed to knock on the door to see if anyone would answer? No. Would it make any difference if the indictment slapped the label of the federal murder statute onto those deficient factual allegations? No.

The criminal end and the alleged agreement have to line up. The indictment cannot be specific on the supposed crime but wishy-washy on the agreement. It cannot say, for example, that the agreement was for “challenging an election” but the criminal end was for “hacking voting machines.”

Now, apply the law to the indictment. What intended result does the Trump indictment allege to have been the criminal object of the Trump conspiracy?

The indictment concedes that lying alone is not a crime. It concedes that neither is contesting election procedures with lawsuits. The indictment instead appears to claim that those things together, combined with urging Vice President Mike Pence to decline temporarily to count electoral votes, is the criminal object of the charged conspiracy. Pence is not alleged to have been part of the charged conspiracy -- so the alleged agreement was among others just to urge Pence to decline to...

Morning Mistress

 

The 90 Miles Mystery Video: Nyctophilia Edition #1481

Before You Click On The "Read More" Link, 

Suggestions For Future Videos? 

Email me.

Combine These Three Lines:

Line1:   mikemiles

Line2:   @

Line3:    protonmail.com

Are You Digging The Mystery Vibe?

Please Only Do So If You Are Over 21 Years Old.

If You are Easily Upset, Triggered Or Offended, This Is Not The Place For You.  

Please Leave Silently Into The Night......

The 90 Miles Mystery Box: Episode #2178

You have come across a mystery box. But what is inside? 

It could be literally anything from the serene to the horrific, 

from the beautiful to the repugnant, 

from the mysterious to the familiar.

If you decide to open it, you could be disappointed, 

you could be inspired, you could be appalled. 

This is not for the faint of heart or the easily offended. 

You have been warned.

Hot Pick Of The Late Night

 

Girls With Guns

Taxpayer-funded ‘inclusive science’ fellowship excludes white faculty

Legal group calls fellowship a ‘blatant violation’ of federal law

White faculty are excluded from a National Science Foundation-funded “inclusive science” fellowship, in what one legal group calls a “blatant violation” of federal law.

The “Inclusive Science Communication Fellowship” is “supported by a $2.8 million collaborative National Science Foundation grant” and run by the University of Rhode Island Metcalf Institute, Michigan State University’s Knight Center for Environmental Journalism and the University of Rhode Island Science and Story Lab.

The fellowship “will address a significant gap in science communication research and training by centering the motivations, experiences, and priorities of racial and ethnic minority scientists,” according to its description.

A requirement is that applicants “[s]elf-identify as Black or African American, Indigenous or Native American, Hispanic or Latina/e/o/x, Asian or Asian American, Middle Eastern or North African.”

This raises legal issues according to the Foundation Against Intolerance and Racism.

“Barring application based on race, skin color, or national origin is a blatant violation of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act,” Leigh Ann O’Neill, managing director of legal advocacy, told The College Fix via a media statement.

“We are very disheartened to see the eligibility requirements for the upcoming SciComm Identities Project,” O’Neill said.

“Title VI of the Civil Rights Act prohibits Federally-funded programs from discriminating against individuals on the basis of race, skin color, and national origin – precisely what the SciComm program openly admits to doing,” she said.

While the group “enthusiastically support[s] efforts to ensure greater diversity and inclusion in every professional field,” this “must be done by legal means.”

The Fix asked the National Science Foundation if an attorney had reviewed the program to ensure compliance with the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and why white faculty were excluded. The spokesperson ignored those questions.

“As a federal leader in STEM education and workforce development, NSF has a long history of support for STEM education and continues to pioneer new programs and science-based approaches to broaden participation,” the spokesperson told The Fix. “Through strategic partnerships and investments across the agency, it has long supported research to...