With few exceptions, the common law upon which US jurisprudence is based employs one of two “burdens of proof” in litigation: the “beyond a reasonable doubt” standard used in criminal prosecutions, a very high bar requiring compelling evidence; or the “preponderance of the evidence” standard employed widely in civil cases, a sort of 51 percent test that the claims of a party are “more likely than not” true. These standards are usefully transferred to environmental issues including global warming and ecotoxins.

Plastic wind turbines and heat pumps join the pack of polluting industries ... which are without doubt climate-polluting in their manufacture.
In science, there was once a logical process built on the idea of hypothesis, graduated to theory, and accepted as “law” when proved by repeated evidentiary experimentation.  In our current climate cult, the so-called climate science is treated as “law” by “consensus” — not by scientific proof. At best, science can be said to have surmounted the lesser legal burden of proof of preponderance: surely not “beyond a reasonable doubt.”
Yes, I expect many will howl that “We don’t have the luxury of waiting for the proof,” but I here propound the very opposite — beyond all reasonable doubt, we do not possess the luxury of this toxic cult any longer. In pursuit of the dubious, unscientific claim that greenhouse gases are warming the planet, humanity is releasing ecotoxins that kill plant and animal (including human) life, and that remain in the environment essentially forever.
There may be equivocal science about how toxic or dangerous these various chemicals are (largely because they go untested and loosely regulated — even subsidized!), but there is now no question that they persist for generations, even thousands of years, and that they accumulate in the human body. The scientific evidence of microplastics in the human brain, the human heart, and human reproduction systems is now established beyond any reasonable doubt.
We l...