Welcome to NexusFi: the best trading community on the planet, with over 150,000 members Sign Up Now for Free
Genuine reviews from real traders, not fake reviews from stealth vendors
Quality education from leading professional traders
We are a friendly, helpful, and positive community
We do not tolerate rude behavior, trolling, or vendors advertising in posts
We are here to help, just let us know what you need
You'll need to register in order to view the content of the threads and start contributing to our community. It's free for basic access, or support us by becoming an Elite Member -- see if you qualify for a discount below.
-- Big Mike, Site Administrator
(If you already have an account, login at the top of the page)
The child petitioners – aged between 8 to 17 – allege that Member States’ failure to tackle the climate crisis constitutes a violation of child rights. They urge the independent body to order Member States to take action to protect children from the devastating impacts of climate change.
“Change needs to happen now if we are to avoid the worst consequences. The climate crisis is not just the weather. It means also, lack of food and lack of water, places that are unliveable and refugees because of it. It is scary,” said Greta Thunberg.
The complaint was filed through the Third Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child, a voluntary mechanism which allows children or adults on their behalf to appeal directly to the United Nations for help if a country that has ratified the Protocol fails to provide a remedy for a rights violation.
Deputy Executive Director Charlotte Petri Gornitzka. “We fully support children exercising their rights and taking a stand. Climate change will impact every single one of them. It’s no wonder they are uniting to fight back.”
It is disgusting how many buy into the sales BS of the PR company that delay action on Big Tobacco by 30 years. Bug tobacco new the truth and they waged an effective disinformation war on the public "weal there are two side to the debate"
Big oil hired the same bullshit artists with the same devastating effect- 30 years of delay on the world crisis.
The house is burning down. Are you dancing on the decks of the titanic??
Are you celebrating your own stupidity and ignorance, shouting joyfully what an ill-informed idiot you are?
This is not whether you think basil or cilantro will enhance the flavor of your salad debate. This is the life of the planet - its plants, animals, fish and insects.
Two hundred species are going extinct each day!!
Let me repeat that
Two hundred species are going extinct each day!!
well I am sure you didn't listen or really think about what that means so I will repeat
Two hundred species are going extinct each day!!
every day
every day, every day, day after day....
Are you deaf to the pain of the planet's life?
Do you only care about govt giving more and more subsides by govt to fossil fuel companies.. lining the pocket of the rich, fat, sickening ugly at the top?
the reality has been crustal clear. - but you leave your car running and talk about education of your children for their future.. SHAME ON YOU!!!
8 years only 8 years
and you party on on the decks of the titanic, Sing songs of "technology will save us" to the tune to "hey its all about me.."
David Wallace-Wells: ‘Why climate change is gravely worse than feared'
" we did the damage and so we can undo the damage.
Nearly everything about it is within our power"
Bullshit David!
Bullshit!!
- fossil fuel elites - CEO, PR AND Media did the damage. We the people have NO say on what they did how they lied to the masses and the evil of their hearts to continue to kill the planet.
How many CEOs (PB Shell, Exon -etc) called to say well=-done?
How many journalists said - we;ll done - not alarmist enough - I too will Learn an tell the story?
How many politicians aid - well done - yes it was we politicians with the power to implement change that choose inaction. - we will/are going to take massive action NOW.
We haven't written this story - they have and they love it - the dollars and the destruction.
That shows where restoring nature or preventing its loss provide the biggest benefits, says Balvanera.
The magnitude of those impacts won’t be mitigated by technology or infrastructure, she says. South Asia would have to build thousands of water treatment plants to provide the clean water people need, while nature can do it for free. Madagascar can’t afford to build seawalls to protect its coasts but it could restore its coastal communities of mangroves and seagrasses.
Although I believe we should be good stewards of our beautiful planet. I just do not get all the irational aniexity? Im more in line with the late George Carlin. My favorite liberal! https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=EjmtSkl53h4
As ExxonMobil heads to court this week for a New York lawsuit accusing it of misleading investors about climate change, a team of researchers at George Mason, Harvard and Bristol universities tracked evidence of a decades-long campaign of alleged deception at the oil giant that the scientists say has confused the American public.
Their report issued Monday draws parallels between the campaigns launched by tobacco companies to delay dangerous health findings from smoking to the fossil-fuel industry’s go-slow response to climate change.The authors highlighted the tactics used by the campaigns, “including trotting out fake experts, promoting conspiracy theories and cherry-picking evidence.”
They pointed to specific examples employed by ExxonMobil XOM, +0.23% , including an ad that ran in the New York Times in 2004 that read like an editorial. It advocated a “balanced” scientific approach to climate-change study, giving much weight to those skeptical of the prevailing research, even as the broader science community was united.
“Climate deniers directly impact the scientific community — and, in turn, its ability to serve the public good — by forcing climate scientists to respond to bad-faith demands and arguably causing a chilling effect pressuring scientists to underplay scientific results,” wrote George Mason’s John Cook, Harvard’s Geoffrey Supran and Australia-based Bristol’s Stephan Lewandowsky and colleagues. The academic findings largely echo 2015 reporting by the Los Angeles Times and Inside Climate News that detailed ExxonMobil’s anti-climate-change campaign.
ExxonMobil had previously dismissed much of the prevailing research as the work of anti-oil activists and paid media placement, although its own internal documents going back to the 1950s show that in-house scientists were explicitly aware of the potential dangers of human-caused climate change caused by their product. Exxon has more recently joined certain private sector-led global pledges to promote more energy sources.
Read: Companies are too slow with shift to carbon neutral, say investors with $35 trillion at stake
On Tuesday, New York’s lawsuit, which alleges the company misled investors, is set to go to trial in state Supreme Court in Manhattan. The trial is the culmination of an investigation into Exxon and its accounting practices covering four years and three New York attorneys general. It is expected to include as a witness former Secretary of State Rex Tillerson, who was Exxon’s chief executive from 2006 to 2016.
The suit said the company’s misrepresentations caused investors to overvalue its stock. It estimated the damage to shareholders to be between $476 million and $1.6 billion. Exxon shares are up about 0.8% in the year to date, but down 8.4% in the past three months. The Dow Jones Industrial Average DJIA, +0.57% is up 15% in 2019.
Exxon has denied wrongdoing and said a reasonable investor wouldn’t expect to know such internal details, the Wall Street Journal reported. The company has also accused the attorneys general involved, all Democrats, of being motivated by politics, which the office has denied.
The company has created its own public relations campaign to address the #ExxonKnew controversy.
Massachusetts Attorney General Maura Healy has sent her own notice to Exxon of her office’s intent to sue in civil court for violating the state’s Consumer Protection Act “by engaging in unfair or deceptive acts” regarding the sale and branding of fossil fuel products.
Exxon’s lawyers have asked the Superior Court of Massachusetts’ Suffolk County to wait at least until the New York trial has ended.
New York’s result could have major implications for the future of climate-related lawsuits.
Federal judges have tossed out earlier climate-change cases, including when New York, San Francisco and other cities sued oil companies in the past several years to recoup costs incurred from the effects of rising global temperatures.
