Gov. Kathy Hochul signed a bill into law Dec. 26 to create the Climate Change Superfund Act, which will be used to make repairs caused by extreme weather events, the Associated Press reported.
More importantly, the new law also requires companies that are supposedly responsible for greenhouse gas emissions to pay into the state fund.
Peter Murphy, of the Committee for a Constructive Tomorrow, calls the new law “preposterous on multiple levels,” beginning with the “junk science” about climate change it is based on.
“It somehow assigns carbon emissions as pollutants,” he tells AFN, “that are altering and causing extreme weather events."
The basic claim of climate change fear is that carbon dioxide emissions, known as CO2, are warming the planet and threatening mankind’s existence.
Even though secular scientists say the Earth has warmed and cooled over 2 billion years, creating five major ice ages, a core tenet of climate change ideology is that mankind is unnaturally altering the Earth’s natural state with carbon pollutions.
That apocalyptic view is why Sen. Liz Krueger, a Democrat who sponsored the bill, has bragged oil and gas companies will be “held accountable” for the “climate crisis” they are making worse.
There is no evidence man-made carbon emissions are causing extreme weather, Murphy counters.
“We've had hurricanes and storm activity for as long as the Earth has been here,” he advises, “regardless of the levels of carbon.”
Yet the new state law is going after the alleged “malefactors” of extreme weather with a goal of collecting $75 billion over the next 25 years.
Meanwhile, blue-state New York is chasing away its corporations and its citizens. More than 150 Wall Street firms have left the state for more business-friendly locations, and New York has led other states – even California – in population loss.
According to the Associated Press story, New York’s politicians have yet to determine which companies are most responsible and how much they will be forced to contribute to the state fund.
“Never mind the fact that even if you accept their ridiculous science, it's completely arbitrary and capricious to come up with a calculation like that to assign responsibility,” Murphy argues. “So this is just wrong on so many levels."