The Earth’s climate changes. The historical record is pretty clear on this reality, and thanks to modern equipment and greater proliferation of temperature recording devices, information on the current changing climate is being gathered and studied.

The problem lies in the assumption that, with this greater ability to track and gather global climatic information, humanity can completely determine how and why the climate changes. The ecofascists even have the hubris to believe that humanity has the power to control it.

Has humanity contributed to current climate change? According to the climate alarmist lobby, the answer to that question is a definite yes, and to even question that is to engage in scientific denialism on par with flat-eartherism.

Of course, climate alarmist dogma insists that the burning of fossil fuels is the primary cause and driver of Earth’s current apparent warming.

Ergo, with this anthropomorphic climate change dogma established as supposedly indisputable “fact,” the desire to reap gain from this blame game is apparently insatiable for unscrupulous lawyers.

A current court case in Washington State is demonstrating this dynamic at play.

Back in the summer of 2021, a woman in Seattle was found dead in her car. The city was going through a heat wave, and sadly, this woman succumbed to the high heat in her non-air-conditioned vehicle. A tragic accident or even a foolish mistake on the part of the deceased.

But some unscrupulous folks saw an opportunity in this woman’s death to blame it on climate change and pin said climate change on Big Oil. These lawyers are trying to make this a novel case of so-called “climate homicide.”

Now, five oil companies — Exxon Mobil, BP, Chevron, Shell, and ConocoPhillips — are being sued under the ridiculous claim that their products have been “altering the Earth’s atmosphere.”

Of course, that this claim can even begin to be entertained depends on the erroneous notion that anthropogenic climate change dogma is “settled science.” But worse yet, even if climate change is primarily man-caused, that still does not justify such legal contortions to paint companies that provide the very means that make modern life even possible as the great killers of mankind and the planet.

But the two siren songs of power and money are evidently hard to resist. The anti-fossil-fuel nuts continue to promote the nonsense idea that if it weren’t for Big Oil, humanity would be much further down the green energy road. Poppycock.

If it weren’t for Big Oil, humanity would still be burning coal.

But even worse than seeking to extract a massive payout from Big Oil companies for their supposed liability in this Seattle woman’s death is the effort to undermine America’s legal system and sensibility. This is about twisting the law into a pretzel as a means to achieve a desired end, not with the aim of arriving at anything even remotely resembling justice.

Here, the climate alarmists are using the Big Tobacco model and stretching it to fit Big Oil. As the complaint states, these oil companies’ “willful and deceitful campaign has influenced the public’s purchasing and investment decisions for decades, driving increased demand for fossil fuels,” and “has also reduced demand for and investment in clean energy, thereby delaying the clean energy transition.” Furthermore, they assert, “these products have never been safe because their intended use or foreseeable misuse creates a risk of catastrophic harm to the climate and humankind.”

This is not about a search for truth or justice. This is about advancing a dubious agenda through a twisted legal theory in an effort to compel people and companies into compliance by leveraging the power of the courts.