false

For the better part of a decade, there have been lawsuits against fossil fuel companies for their actions related to climate change. The Center for Climate Integrity, a nonprofit that provides legal support to communities suing oil companies, has tracked 32 cases filed by state attorneys general, cities, counties, and tribal nations against companies including Exxon Mobil, BP, and Shell.

There has been extensive news reporting about oil companies’ efforts to undermine the scientific consensus about the climate as well as revelations about oil companies hiding their own research over decades projecting the dangers of climate change.

Oil companies have long sought to shut down the lawsuits or move them from the state courts where they were filed to federal courts where they believe national regulations could override local governments’ claims against them. But a string of circuit court and U.S. Supreme Court decisions have ruled that the cases alleging violations of state laws do belong in state courts.

The first case to reach trial will likely be a Massachusetts case against Exxon Mobil and that could happen as soon as next year.

What do these lawsuits seek? Some seek to force oil companies to pay for the past and future damages caused by climate change that are costing states and communities billions of dollars. Others seek to stop defendants from making false and misleading statements about the effects of burning fossil fuels, from greenwashing their own activities, and to fund corrective education campaigns.

The first trials could lead to a tidal wave of new cases, similar to what happened in the 1990s when tobacco companies were forced to pay billions of dollars under legal settlements.

**********

Web Links

After a long slog, climate change lawsuits will finally put Big Oil on trial

Photo, posted August 18, 2021, courtesy of Chad Davis via Flickr.

Earth Wise is a production of WAMC Northeast Public Radio

There are sizeable numbers of people who hold to beliefs that run counter to overwhelming contrary evidence. Flat Earthers and Holocaust deniers are well-known examples and, more recently, people – some of them in high places – who reject the evidence for climate change.

New research published in the journal Open Mind by developmental psychologists at UC Berkeley suggest that feedback, rather than hard evidence, boosts people’s sense of certainty when learning new things or trying to tell right from wrong. People’s beliefs are more likely to be reinforced by the positive or negative reactions they are exposed to than by logic, reasoning, and scientific data.

People’s learning habits can limit one’s intellectual horizons. According to the study, if you think you know a lot about something, even though you don’t, you’re less likely to be curious enough to explore the topic further and will fail to learn how little you know.

This phenomenon plays out in social media and cable-news echo chambers and explains how some people are easily duped by charlatans. Receiving positive feedback for what they are saying can make people believe they know more than they actually do. This confidence makes them less likely to seek out and learn more information about the subject, as well as take into account contradicting opinions or facts.

Another factor is that what influences people’s certainty is that their confidence tends to depend on what they heard most recently rather than on long-term cumulative data. A few pieces of recent information tend to get much more attention than an extensive body of data. If a crazy theory is able to make a correct prediction a few times, people tend to get fixed in their belief in that theory and be less open to other information.

**********

Web Links

Here’s Why People Advocate False Beliefs, Conspiracy Theories Despite Evidence

Photo, posted February 2, 2007, courtesy of Tim J. Keegan via Flickr.

Earth Wise is a production of WAMC Northeast Public Radio.