Will Coleman actually sue Gore, when it will expose him to a countersuit for "abuse of process"?

Question

If you file a lawsuit against someone with no good cause, they can collect damages against you for abuse of process.

Since all these guys agree with Gore, Coleman would seem to be at risk for that.

The National Academy of Sciences, the American Association for the Advancement of Science, the American Institute of Physics, the American Chemical Society, the American Geophysical Union, the American Meteorological Association, etc.

Also:

"The overwhelming majority of atmospheric scientists around the world and our own National Academy of Sciences are in essential agreement on the facts of global warming and the significant contribution of human activity to that trend."

Russell E. Train, former environmental official under Presidents Nixon and Ford

"Our nation has both an obligation and self-interest in facing head-on the serious environmental, economic and national security threat posed by global warming."

John McCain, Republican, Senator, Arizona

etc.

Answer 1

It doesn't matter who you list as supporting AGW. The fact that so many of the organizations and individuals you list are sponsored, funded or otherwise controlled by government makes them just as suspect as anyone funded by big oil. Since the result of adopting any treaty now being considered would be a quantum leap in political power for the governments involved, I'm reluctant to take the word of those same government bodies for anything.

But the fact is, the consensus doesn't hold that we're facing catastrophe, but that human activity is a major cause of the warming we observed that seems to have stopped in 1998. They certainly do not agree with the fiction in An Inconvenient Truth that a UK court has already determined to have serious factual errors and a political agenda.

How many times have we been told the sky is falling, yet there it is, right above us as before. We've weathered countless scares from cyclamates to alar to peak oil and global cooling. Now they've got the mother of all scare campaigns going and many of us just don't buy it.

CO2 doesn't always drive temperature as you can see by looking at the graph at the link below. You may note that CO2 levels have been over 10 times higher than today with temp at about the same level or lower.

And since the Oreskes study has been called into question repeatedly, why doesn't someone repeat it and see if it's accurate? And what was the 'consensus' she found?

"Human activities ... are modifying the concentration of atmospheric constituents ... that absorb or scatter radiant energy. Most of the observed warming over the last 50 years is likely to have been due to the increase in greenhouse gas concentrations." Hmm. Most of the warming...likely to have been caused... No wiggle room there, nope, it's ironclad: the Earth may be getting warmer and people may have something to do with it.

Answer 2

Since a British court has already found that there are "factual errors" in Gore's little story, it seems that a defense against "abuse of process" is the real no brainer here.

Still, there will be no lawsuit.  There are too many environmentalists who would rise to support Gore.  

Your list of Gore's "supporters" includes those who have been extremely critical of Al's claims.

Note:

You seem to be quoting politicians and career bureaucrats for scientific support of late.  Is that wise?  Have the alarmists been reduced to this?

Answer 3

No Coleman is just pursuing publicity, and that purpose is served without the actual lawsuit.  ExxonMobil however is reponsible for 5% of our carbon emissions, so they have ample incentive to fund someone to sue Al as a media stunt (like Coleman's comments).  I wouldn't be surprised if it happened, but surely they can get someone more credible than a TV weatherman involved.  Coleman can't even forecast the weather correctly a few days out, so how can he understand much longer term climate trends?

Don't quote McCain as if he cared about global warming.  In my opinion his statements appear to be highly disingenuous, and he will reneg on his committment to global warming as fast as Bush did.  He was the only senator that skipped a critical vote recently to end oil industry subsidies and fund alternative energy, and the bill lost due to his his missing vote.

It would be a fascinating lawsuit though, because it would deal in facts.  Facts like these:

http://norvig.com/oreskes.html

The consensus was quantified in a Science study by Prof. Naomi Oreskes (Dec. 2004) in which she surveyed 928 scientific journal articles that matched the search [global climate change] at the ISI Web of Science. Of these, according to Oreskes, 75% agreed with the consensus view (either implicitly or explicitly), 25% took no stand one way or the other, and none rejected the consensus.

Answer 4

No, the key words in Coleman's speech were

“If the lawyers will take the case – sue"

No lawyer is going to take a no-brainer loser of a case against carbon credit companies, unless maybe they're paid really, really well regardless of the outcome.

Perhaps this will be the Heartland Institute's next charade.

Answer 5

We SUE to much in this country.  And I am frankly tired of Global Warming, and the So called experts and all their credentials.  I worked with many in my life and for the most part they are wind bags with accumulated knowledge. When it comes to getting things done they can't, to much blah blah blah blah blah blah.

Answer 6

The correct answer is "NO".

Coleman seems to be full of the stuff associated with the greenhouse gas methane.  There is no case, he has no lawyer, and no courtroom in the country that probably wouldn't throw this out in an instant.  This was nothing but a ridiculous PR statement.  And his minion followers demonstrate their ignorance of both science and law, by swallowing it as reasonable.

Answer 7

It all sounds like a big political boondoggle to me Bob, you know, more bread and circuses for the masses. If we are lucky, when this all blows over, we will figure out what the real issues they are hiding from us.

Answer 8

I hope he does. Al Gore is a fraud. Man-made Global Warming is a fraud.

Answer 9

Abuse of Process? what have you been smoking?  Of course if you find the right scientist they will agree to Global Warming, you just have to find the right ones :)  So I hope he does get sued because he is abusing his power, and he is a hypocrite. :)  I'm sure I will add more as it comes to me ;)