The paper is here

all 10 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 35 points 2 months ago (1 child)

Sue insurance companies who ignored the data and did not sell flood insurance in Indiana

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 23 points 2 months ago (1 child)

    I read the article. If I understand it, they can now link weather events to emissions but not necessarily an industry or individual polluter. But what excites them most about this area of attribution science is that this is just the beginning and there is much more to come. Is that accurate?

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 18 points 2 months ago

    Kill more executives. Court is nothing but a slap on the wrist, as the very best case scenario.

  • source
  • [–] 10 points 2 months ago

    No raindrop believes it is responsible for the flood. Also something about Julius Caesar. Oh, and fuck those corporations. They always knew.

  • source
  • [–] 5 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 child)

    Cool, but US states (with most of those companies) signed a bill that you can't sue them.

    Edit: corrrection

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 2 points 2 months ago

    Game on fuckers

  • source
  • [–] 2 points 2 months ago*

    until the people personally gaining from things like decades of corporate propoganda about climate change face any consequences, things like this will keep happening

    but, sure, lets focus on making a bunch of lawyers rich by punishing a collection of capital on paper :shrug:

  • source