Supreme Court in June 2011 reminds CO2 is necessary for life, shouldn't be target of indiscriminate attacks, notes EPA says scientists' views vary

In 2011, Justice Ginsberg urged caution on the topic of CO2, noting it's necessary for life. The Supreme Court did not criminalize CO2 in the 2007 case (Massachusetts v EPA) but this fact may not be well understood.

6/23/11, "Lawrence Solomon: Supreme skeptics," Financial Post, Lawrence Solomon

"The justices of the United States Supreme Court this week became the world’s most august global warming sceptics. Not by virtue of their legal reasoning – the global warming case they decided turned on a technical legal issue — but in their surprising commentary. Global warming is by no means a settled issue, they made clear, suggesting it would be

• foolhardy to assume it was.

“The court, we caution, endorses no particular view of the complicated issues related to carbon-dioxide emissions and climate change,” reads the 8-0 decision,

• delivered by the court’s acclaimed liberal,
  

• Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg.

The court decision noted that the Environmental Protection Agency itself had “Acknowledg[ed] that not all scientists agreed on the causes and consequences of the rise in global temperatures,” before suggesting readers consult “views opposing” the conventional wisdom. Specifically, the justices’ recommended reading was a superb profile of Princeton’s Freeman Dyson, perhaps America’s most respected scientist, written in the New York Times Magazine, March 29, 2009....

Justice Ginsburg notes carbon dioxide is necessary and ubiquitous, and thus shouldn’t be the target of indiscriminate attacks. “After all, we each emit carbon dioxide merely by breathing,” she notes, repeating a point that Dyson couldn’t have said better himself.

To see exactly what the Supreme Court said in its remarkable American Electric Power v. Connecticut decision, click here."

=========================

While CO2 has increased, temperatures have decreased, per UAH and HADCRUT for the US and globally (bright green and bright blue lines). CO2 does not cause global warming. The UN's computerized predictions were quite wrong Unfortunately, trillions of dollars have been stolen from people and lives lost based on a falsehood. ed.

=========================

• Entergy was one of the plaintiffs in the 2007 Supreme Court case which it won. Entergy stock rose to an all time high:
  

1. April 6, 2007: Supreme Court CO2 decision favored big business. Big energy company Entergy was among plaintiffs-and winners-in the 2007 US Supreme Court case ruling (5 to 4) that carbon dioxide was a pollutant (4/2/07):

• "Wall St. understood this. On Monday, when the EPA decision came down, Entergy stock
  
• jumped to an all time high of $107.52 per share."...

• The ruling made big money for Entergy Corp.

2. October 2009, Entergy's chairman hysterically advances the possible

• extinction of humanity without urgent action on global warming and

cap and trade. The Chairman of Entergy speaks at a White House meeting portraying his

• giant corporation as a humanitarian against evil Wall Street interests.

.