{"id":8291,"date":"2019-02-08T09:50:57","date_gmt":"2019-02-08T16:50:57","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/gelbspanfiles.com\/?p=8291"},"modified":"2024-12-06T12:20:25","modified_gmt":"2024-12-06T19:20:25","slug":"amicus-brief-brule-cci-farrell-franta-lewandowsky-oreskes-supran","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"http:\/\/gelbspanfiles.com\/?p=8291","title":{"rendered":"Amicus brief, Brule, CCI, Farrell, Franta, Lewandowsky, Oreskes, Supran"},"content":{"rendered":"

Here we go again. When I said in my December 14, 2018 blog post<\/a> (and its Part 2<\/a>), that enviro-activists only have a one-trick pony to use in their character assassination efforts against skeptic climate scientists, that’s no exaggeration. Their lack of diversity isn’t restricted to only minor league ‘reporters’ lately, it’s the only thing the most famous accusers have in their arsenal as evidence of a ‘skeptics \/ fossil fuel industry executives disinformation’ conspiracy. Look no farther for that than the 1\/29\/19 “Brief Of Amici Curiae<\/em>, Robert Brule, Center For Climate Integrity, Justin Farrell, Benjamin Franta, Stephan Lewandowsky, Naomi Oreskes, and Geoffrey Supran<\/del><\/a>“*<\/strong><\/span> for the San Mateo <\/em>\/ Imperial Beach <\/em>\/ Marin<\/em><\/a> \/<\/strong> Santa Cruz<\/em><\/a> v Chevron<\/em>, California global warming lawsuits. Instead of presenting a more convincing argument for repeated use of the same old ‘leaked memo evidence,’ this little amici curiae<\/em> group only amplifies how much of a problem it creates.<\/p>\n

*<\/strong><\/span>[Author’s 3\/18\/22 update: for some inexplicable reason, that Columbia U. link first defaulted to the wrong<\/strong> amici curiae brief and then stopped working altogether. It didn’t when I first posted it, and the Internet Archive page for the link goes to the correct brief<\/a>. Columbia U. has reassigned this brief to a new url addresses enough times now that I’ll just post the most current available link<\/a> rather than pile on to a list of incorrect links.]<\/em><\/p>\n

Not helping the situation at all is how this amici curiae<\/em> filing is just one of eight other filings all submitted toward those California court cases all in the same day. I leave that strange situation for others to detail<\/a>. Not helping this particular “Brule [sic] et al.” situation is how the preparers of the filling misspelled Robert Brulle<\/a>\u2019s name twice<\/a>, and labeled one of the municipality plaintiffs<\/a> as the “County of Imperial Beach” when it is the “City<\/em><\/strong> of<\/a>..”<\/p>\n

There’s a far bigger problem. This first involves quite a bit of setup which I illustrate mostly with links to screencapture images. Watch what happens when brief history angles of these individuals are examined, relative to how they support the notion that industry money buys lies from skeptic climate scientists:<\/p>\n