"In short, the state attorneys general object to the document treating facts as facts, as there have been lawsuits that contested them. "Among other things, the Manual states that human activities have 'unequivocally warmed the climate,' that it is 'extremely likely' human influence drives ocean warming, and that researchers are 'virtually certain' about ocean acidification," their letter states, "treating contested litigation positions as settled fact.""
"These complaints were mixed in with some more potentially reasonable complaints about how the climate chapter gave specific suggestions on how to legally approach some issues, and assigned significance to one or two recent studies that haven't yet been validated by follow-on work. But the letter's authors would not settle for revisions based on a few reasonable complaints; instead, they demand the entire chapter be removed because it accurately reflects the status of climate science."
State attorneys general objected to a Federal Judicial Center manual chapter that presented climate findings as settled facts despite ongoing lawsuits contesting them. They pointed to statements asserting that human activities have unequivocally warmed the climate, that human influence is extremely likely driving ocean warming, and that researchers are virtually certain about ocean acidification. The attorneys general also criticized labeling the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change an authoritative science body, citing dissent from a conservative Canadian think tank. They combined those criticisms with concerns about legal guidance and premature emphasis on unvalidated studies and demanded removal of the chapter. The Federal Judicial Center agreed and removed the climate chapter, though the foreword still references it.
Read at Ars Technica
Unable to calculate read time
Collection
[
|
...
]