Despite not yet appearing on the Sher Edling law firm’s page for their collection of lawsuit filings<\/a> as of this publication date, they are clearly the law firm for the plaintiffs<\/a>. What other ingredients are needed to make this Maui<\/em> filing into a Sher Edling law firm boilerplate copy?<\/p>\n Boilerplate copy, Q.E.D. Well, almost. What does this Maui<\/em> filing not<\/em><\/strong> get to share with its Honolulu neighbor or fellow island state Rhode Island? Reliance on critically missing words<\/a> within a speech from President Lyndon Johnson in order to float the unsupportable idea that President Johnson “knew” about man-caused global warming in 1965. Compare Rhode Island,<\/em> where I detailed the missing words problem and how it sources to Naomi Oreskes in the second half of my Rhode Island v. Chevron<\/em> dissection<\/a> \u2026<\/p>\n \u2026 to Honolulu<\/em> \u2026<\/p>\n \u2026 and to Maui<\/em>.<\/p>\n What’s up with that omission, why doesn’t Maui<\/em> get to have that faulty claim? And how does it work out that Sher Edling’s Charleston v Brabham Oil<\/em>, filed on 9\/9\/20<\/a> gets to have that problematic Lyndon Johnson 3 dots\/missing words item<\/a> in it, while the next-day-filed<\/a> 9\/10\/20 Delaware v. BP<\/em> does not<\/strong><\/a>?<\/p>\n Reporters who don’t adhere to the basic tenets of journalism want the public to believe there’s a “new wave<\/a>” of these lawsuit filings, or a “mounting number \/ growing body<\/a>” of them, or \u2014 only days after the filing of Maui v Sunoco<\/em> \u2014 a “coming wave \/ recent swell<\/a>” of these, each being above reproach with their content.<\/p>\n “Problems with the assertions in them?”<\/em>, the reporters exclaim, “What problems? We don’t have time to fact-check these things, and besides, the story of organized denial has been well told and documented.<\/em>” No, it hasn’t, it’s where that citation cascade problem<\/a> rears its ugly head, pointing straight back to basically a single dubious source.<\/p>\n I’d argue that the latest growing problem is the sheer number of these lawsuit filings that all seem to share a common ingredients list. By my current count<\/a>, however, an argument could be made that all of the fourteen Sher Edling boilerplate \/ assisted filings could be wadded up into one big single one, while the four Pawa-led ones could be consolidated into a single one as well (where possibly two of those might be transferred into the Sher Edling ball if their own announcement about two of the Pawa-led California filings<\/a> is an indicator of that action). One plus one plus five ‘independently led’ lawsuits equals just seven \u2014 hardly definable as any sort of big wave. And since the D.C. v Exxon<\/em> one that I’d formerly listed as ‘independently led’ was claimed as a Sher Edling one, what assurance do we have that the others that have far too similar of an appearance to Sher Edling’s filings won’t get vacuumed up into their giant single wad?<\/p>\n Then there’s this other problem with reporting about these lawsuit filings, nicely illustrated<\/a> by the aforementioned “coming wave \/ recent swell” report<\/a>:<\/p>\n The disinformation campaigns have since been corroborated by leaked internal memos, including one from the American Petroleum Institute<\/strong>\u2019s Global Climate Science Communications team known as the \u201cvictory memo,\u201d with victory defined as the public coming to \u201cunderstand\u201d the uncertainties of climate science.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n No, they haven’t. That abject failure is instead what will potentially sink<\/em><\/strong> every one of these lawsuits while also exposing just who it is who put all their faith in the disinformation narrative about ‘leaked memos proving skeptic climate scientists colluded with fossil fuel industry execs to deceived the public about the harm of man-caused global warming.’<\/p>\n Reporters in the mainstream media would know that Titanic problem<\/a> if only so many of them weren’t essentially unquestioningly repeating propaganda lines likely fed to them from the very people<\/a> who are trying to keep all these lawsuits afloat<\/a>.<\/p>\n Neglected as the global warming issue is among other much bigger controversial news items lately, it’s still a major indicator of the huge<\/em><\/strong> problem surrounding all of the big controversial news items:\u00a0 mainstream media reporting malfeasance.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" Just three weeks ago, enviro-activists applauded the October 12, 2020 filing of the Maui v. Sunoco lawsuit. No doubt the residents there would see the logic of sharing pretty much all of the lawsuit details with the neighboring Honolulu v. … Continue reading \n
![](\"http:\/\/gelbspanfiles.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/11\/Maui-reposit.jpg\")
<\/p>\n\n
![](\"http:\/\/gelbspanfiles.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/11\/Maui-Victory.jpg\")
<\/p>\n\n
![](\"http:\/\/gelbspanfiles.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/11\/Maui-Black.jpg\")
<\/p>\n\n
![](\"http:\/\/gelbspanfiles.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/11\/MauiSoon.jpg\")
<\/p>\n![](\"http:\/\/gelbspanfiles.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/07\/LBJs-3-dots.jpg\")
<\/p>\n![](\"http:\/\/gelbspanfiles.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/11\/Honolulu-LBJ-3-dots.jpg\")
<\/p>\n![](\"http:\/\/gelbspanfiles.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/11\/Maui-no-dots.jpg\")
<\/p>\n