{"id":390827,"date":"2025-07-25T18:56:51","date_gmt":"2025-07-25T16:56:51","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=390827"},"modified":"2025-07-25T18:57:09","modified_gmt":"2025-07-25T16:57:09","slug":"climate-activism-in-judicial-drag","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=390827","title":{"rendered":"Climate Activism In Judicial Drag"},"content":{"rendered":"\n
\"Judges<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

<\/p>\n\n\n\n

From Watts Up With That?<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Guest Post by<\/em><\/strong> Willis Eschenbach<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n

If you\u2019d asked me last week to imagine the world\u2019s \u201chighest court\u201d declaring climate science settled by judicial fiat, and then threatening the globe with reparations if governments don\u2019t color inside the climate lines, I\u2019d have poured myself a stiff gin-and-tonic and double-checked the URL.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

But alas, welcome to 2025, where the International Court of Justice (ICJ) has just handed down an \u201cadvisory opinion\u201d so ambitious, sanctimonious, and scientifically shallow that it reads less like a court ruling and more like the script for a very, very earnest United Nations bake sale. Their own summary of their latest lunacy is here<\/a>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Let\u2019s set the table. The ICJ was asked by true-green climate activists to weigh in on whether countries that\u2014brace yourself\u2014aren\u2019t \u201cprotecting the climate\u201d<\/em>, whatever that might mean, are guilty of internationally wrongful conduct.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Not just frowned upon. Not just eligible for a stern talking-to.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Nope: guilty. Legally at fault. Reparations, anyone?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Below is a view of the self-important, arrogant, pompous bench-warmers who think they rule both the world and your pocketbook and are the final arbiters of scientific truth.<\/p>\n\n\n

\n
\"A<\/figure>\n<\/div>\n\n\n

And if you thought for a second that their ruling was confined to immediate, actual demonstrable harm, allow me to introduce you to the court\u2019s new climate doctrine: \u201cThe environment is the foundation for all human rights.\u201d<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Human rights are based on the environment? I mean, who knew? Clearly, the authors of the US Declaration of Independence were blissfully ignorant of that claim when they said:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

But nooo \u2026 apparently, the right to a \u201cclean, healthy, and sustainable environment\u201d<\/em> is not just a good aspiration, but a precondition and foundation for everything from shelter to the Declaration of Independence.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In these several dozen pages of turgid judicial prose, the court repeatedly assures us that the science is both \u201cunequivocal\u201d<\/em> and \u201cconsensual.\u201d<\/em> Take a broom and sweep aside the actual, messy debates among climatologists, physicists, statisticians, and economists. Why bother with IPCC\u2019s footnotes and caveats, uncertainty ranges, or the fact that roughly half the scientific world\u2019s population is busy fighting over causal attributions, model reliability, emission pathways, and feedbacks? The ICJ can clear all that up with a wave of the bench.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Never mind that many credentialed scientists\u2014yes, those with tenure, lab coats, and neural networks\u2014keep pointing out flaws in everything from the accuracy of climate models to the lack of robust evidence connecting certain weather events directly to CO\u2082 emissions.<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Those tedious debates? Airbrushed away, replaced by a judicially anointed TRUTH, enforceable anywhere a lawyer can file papers and find a sympathetic press release.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The court then leaps from this supposedly airtight science to the conclusion that all countries are not just morally but legally required to throttle fossil fuels, pay reparations for \u201cclimate harm,\u201d <\/em>whatever that might be at any instant, and\u2014here\u2019s the kicker\u2014restructure their entire economies and energy grids<\/strong> to satisfy the ambitions of the most anxious delegates in the UN General Assembly.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Oh, and it\u2019s not just about emissions within your own border, but across the ether of international commerce, all the way down to how a can of soup is shipped from Kansas to Kazakhstan.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

If this strikes you as a rather energetic reading of judicial authority, you\u2019re not alone. The ICJ\u2019s ruling doesn\u2019t just interpret treaties\u2014it rewrites them, pastes new concepts of liability on top, and then wags its finger at every government in creation, basically saying: \u201cComply, or risk being labeled an international outlaw \u2026 and subsequently shaken down for damages.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

(The good news is that this is an \u201cadvisory\u201d opinion, not a judicial ruling, and fortunately, any actual power to enforce this is still missing from the court\u2019s toolbelt. But you can expect a flotilla of lawsuits, climate tribunals, and legal NGOs licking their chops.)<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Non-judicial conclusions abound in this ruling. The bench, now apparently staffed with philosophers and prophets, instructs the world\u2019s engineers and energy analysts that mitigation cannot wait, adaptation is mandatory, and\u2014lest you were planning on retiring quietly\u2014the only acceptable future is one with emission reductions \u201cof the highest ambition.\u201d<\/em> You expected law? Foolish you.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

You get a political manifesto disguised in judicial robes.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Be clear, though. The danger here isn\u2019t just about climate. It\u2019s about precedent.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

If international courts now claim the right to set social, economic, and technological policy for the entire planet by declaratory fiat, who needs parliaments, governments, scientific panels, or\u2014heaven forbid\u2014public debate?<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

If some green-hued imaginary version of \u201cthe environment\u201d is an existential human right, why should courts not do the same for \u201calgorithmic fairness,\u201d \u201cbiodiversity equity,\u201d \u201cDEI\u201d, \u201cclimate justice\u201d or whatever cause rolls in next with a chorus of law students and a well-produced video appeal?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

And don\u2019t kid yourself\u2014this opinion will ricochet through national courts, insurance companies, and boardrooms, emboldening activists to weaponize every multinational agreement in the book against anyone who doesn\u2019t toe the line. The threat of endless litigation, the economic blackmail inherent in \u201creparations,\u201d and the specter of legal insecurity will choke innovation, investment, and real-world progress faster than you can say \u201cParis Agreement.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

This ruling is a perfect example of why about two-thirds of the global population lives in countries that have flat-out REFUSED to be ruled by these activist lunatics in black robes \u2026 including, thankfully, the US. The US withdrew from the ICJ\u2019s compulsory jurisdiction in 1986, meaning it is not automatically bound by ICJ judgments. Me, I think we should withdraw from the ICJ entirely and let them play with themselves.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In sum, the ruling isn\u2019t just an overstep. It\u2019s a pole vault over the judicial fence, landing squarely in the realm of politics, philosophy, and scientific orthodoxy enforced by dubious legal muscle. We\u2019re now one step closer to a world where the outcome of complex, unsettled questions gets dictated by robe and gavel, not science, reason, public debate, or reality \u2026 and that is a very dangerous precedent.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Good luck to us all. My solution?

US out of the UN entirely, including out of the ICJ and every other slimy tentacle of the UN. <\/strong>It is a snake-pit of vipers, totalitarians, anti-Semites, self-important \u201cjurists\u201d, and crazy green activists.

UN out of the US entirely. <\/strong>Move the headquarters to Ouagadougou or someplace where the locals need help, forbid the UN employees from using air conditioning so they can \u201cprotect the climate\u201d<\/em>, and see how many UN fat-cats and parasites living the good life in New York City suddenly quit to \u201cspend more time with their families\u201d \u2026<\/p>\n\n\n\n

My best to all, keep fighting the good fight,<\/p>\n\n\n\n

w.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

PS\u2014Yeah, you\u2019ve heard it before.<\/strong> When you comment, quote the exact words you\u2019re discussing, so we can tell what you\u2019re talking about.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

If you\u2019d asked me last week to imagine the world\u2019s \u201chighest court\u201d declaring climate science settled by judicial fiat, and then threatening the globe with reparations if governments don\u2019t color inside the climate lines, I\u2019d have poured myself a stiff gin-and-tonic and double-checked the URL.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":121246920,"featured_media":390832,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_coblocks_attr":"","_coblocks_dimensions":"","_coblocks_responsive_height":"","_coblocks_accordion_ie_support":"","_crdt_document":"","advanced_seo_description":"Explore the ICJ's controversial ruling on climate change, blending legal overreach with scientific debate and its implications for global policies.","jetpack_seo_html_title":"ICJ's Controversial Climate Ruling: Legal Overreach Explored","jetpack_seo_noindex":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":"","jetpack_publicize_message":"","jetpack_publicize_feature_enabled":true,"jetpack_social_post_already_shared":true,"jetpack_social_options":{"image_generator_settings":{"template":"highway","default_image_id":0,"enabled":false},"version":2},"jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false},"categories":[1],"tags":[691829997,691818153,691819140,691823818,691831896,691836798],"class_list":{"0":"post-390827","1":"post","2":"type-post","3":"status-publish","4":"format-standard","5":"has-post-thumbnail","6":"hentry","7":"category-uncategorized","8":"tag-carbon-dioxide-co","9":"tag-climate-models","10":"tag-climate-science","11":"tag-human-rights","12":"tag-international-court-of-justice-icj","13":"tag-true-green-climate-activists","15":"fallback-thumbnail"},"jetpack_publicize_connections":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/07\/0Screenshot-2025-07-25-185554.png?fit=1386%2C577&ssl=1","jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/paxLW1-1DFF","jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":426035,"url":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=426035","url_meta":{"origin":390827,"position":0},"title":"U.S. judges saved from alarmist tome","author":"uwe.roland.gross","date":"13\/02\/2026","format":false,"excerpt":"Quick action by a coalition of States has saved the American judicial system from being presented with a huge hunk of climate alarmism in the guise of guidance. Sounds like a lot and it is. The story starts with a massive judicial tome called the Reference Manual on Scientific Evidence.\u2026","rel":"","context":"In \"climate alarmism\"","block_context":{"text":"climate alarmism","link":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?tag=climate-alarmism"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/02\/0Climate-justice-paint-mural.jpg?fit=1200%2C800&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/02\/0Climate-justice-paint-mural.jpg?fit=1200%2C800&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/02\/0Climate-justice-paint-mural.jpg?fit=1200%2C800&ssl=1&resize=525%2C300 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/02\/0Climate-justice-paint-mural.jpg?fit=1200%2C800&ssl=1&resize=700%2C400 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/02\/0Climate-justice-paint-mural.jpg?fit=1200%2C800&ssl=1&resize=1050%2C600 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":425456,"url":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=425456","url_meta":{"origin":390827,"position":1},"title":"Process Wins One: Federal Judicial Center Deletes Climate Chapter from Judicial Manual","author":"uwe.roland.gross","date":"10\/02\/2026","format":false,"excerpt":"The Federal Judicial Center (FJC), the research and education arm of the U.S. federal judiciary, has removed a chapter on climate science from the fourth edition of its Reference Manual on Scientific Evidence.","rel":"","context":"In \"Climate change\"","block_context":{"text":"Climate change","link":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?tag=climate-change"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/02\/0AQMVgOuqu12iybNbN6fYNRnvW2UNsiRszz4jw_HUV2G4hLSYEXfwmcXuXHvkaQ_HiiRpPPsRcyjeNUyH9JGwSkJQkcp4nBxNbxFfda8Cbl66Ynr2j-cmbvHcVx7-GtV5-1.jpeg?fit=1200%2C564&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/02\/0AQMVgOuqu12iybNbN6fYNRnvW2UNsiRszz4jw_HUV2G4hLSYEXfwmcXuXHvkaQ_HiiRpPPsRcyjeNUyH9JGwSkJQkcp4nBxNbxFfda8Cbl66Ynr2j-cmbvHcVx7-GtV5-1.jpeg?fit=1200%2C564&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/02\/0AQMVgOuqu12iybNbN6fYNRnvW2UNsiRszz4jw_HUV2G4hLSYEXfwmcXuXHvkaQ_HiiRpPPsRcyjeNUyH9JGwSkJQkcp4nBxNbxFfda8Cbl66Ynr2j-cmbvHcVx7-GtV5-1.jpeg?fit=1200%2C564&ssl=1&resize=525%2C300 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/02\/0AQMVgOuqu12iybNbN6fYNRnvW2UNsiRszz4jw_HUV2G4hLSYEXfwmcXuXHvkaQ_HiiRpPPsRcyjeNUyH9JGwSkJQkcp4nBxNbxFfda8Cbl66Ynr2j-cmbvHcVx7-GtV5-1.jpeg?fit=1200%2C564&ssl=1&resize=700%2C400 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/02\/0AQMVgOuqu12iybNbN6fYNRnvW2UNsiRszz4jw_HUV2G4hLSYEXfwmcXuXHvkaQ_HiiRpPPsRcyjeNUyH9JGwSkJQkcp4nBxNbxFfda8Cbl66Ynr2j-cmbvHcVx7-GtV5-1.jpeg?fit=1200%2C564&ssl=1&resize=1050%2C600 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":430017,"url":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=430017","url_meta":{"origin":390827,"position":2},"title":"Ghostwriters for the Courts: The Climate Litigation Network Behind a Withdrawn Judicial Manual","author":"uwe.roland.gross","date":"07\/03\/2026","format":false,"excerpt":"Late last year the federal judiciary quietly released a document that almost nobody outside legal circles normally notices: the fourth edition of the Reference Manual on Scientific Evidence. Within weeks one section of that manual vanished. The reason it vanished reveals something deeply troubling about how climate science, academic institutions,\u2026","rel":"","context":"In \"Climate change\"","block_context":{"text":"Climate change","link":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?tag=climate-change"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/03\/AQOtPlj-twVkVNbjMFxg1FfGA2qhjRHqHhEv1jkG_xP2c3_Q-pJlBktiaHEfpipmIiMwHUIqTP_zFBNrxftyKPXc_AXVTtgjjcEcgwOylKHQSRMrkZg9UjlFnntzFx5aUuNQdF0qrxWoVMEYa8D25eVwetWT.jpeg?fit=1200%2C1200&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/03\/AQOtPlj-twVkVNbjMFxg1FfGA2qhjRHqHhEv1jkG_xP2c3_Q-pJlBktiaHEfpipmIiMwHUIqTP_zFBNrxftyKPXc_AXVTtgjjcEcgwOylKHQSRMrkZg9UjlFnntzFx5aUuNQdF0qrxWoVMEYa8D25eVwetWT.jpeg?fit=1200%2C1200&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/03\/AQOtPlj-twVkVNbjMFxg1FfGA2qhjRHqHhEv1jkG_xP2c3_Q-pJlBktiaHEfpipmIiMwHUIqTP_zFBNrxftyKPXc_AXVTtgjjcEcgwOylKHQSRMrkZg9UjlFnntzFx5aUuNQdF0qrxWoVMEYa8D25eVwetWT.jpeg?fit=1200%2C1200&ssl=1&resize=525%2C300 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/03\/AQOtPlj-twVkVNbjMFxg1FfGA2qhjRHqHhEv1jkG_xP2c3_Q-pJlBktiaHEfpipmIiMwHUIqTP_zFBNrxftyKPXc_AXVTtgjjcEcgwOylKHQSRMrkZg9UjlFnntzFx5aUuNQdF0qrxWoVMEYa8D25eVwetWT.jpeg?fit=1200%2C1200&ssl=1&resize=700%2C400 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/03\/AQOtPlj-twVkVNbjMFxg1FfGA2qhjRHqHhEv1jkG_xP2c3_Q-pJlBktiaHEfpipmIiMwHUIqTP_zFBNrxftyKPXc_AXVTtgjjcEcgwOylKHQSRMrkZg9UjlFnntzFx5aUuNQdF0qrxWoVMEYa8D25eVwetWT.jpeg?fit=1200%2C1200&ssl=1&resize=1050%2C600 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":293463,"url":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=293463","url_meta":{"origin":390827,"position":3},"title":"Programming Judges for Woke Climate\u00a0Rulings","author":"uwe.roland.gross","date":"02\/01\/2024","format":false,"excerpt":"With Enlightenment came\u00a0secularism, with secularism came\u00a0relativism, with relativism came\u00a0leftism, and with leftism comes\u00a0judicial activism.","rel":"","context":"In \"Climate change\"","block_context":{"text":"Climate change","link":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?tag=climate-change"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/01\/0American-Judiciary-system-concept.jpg?fit=1200%2C800&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/01\/0American-Judiciary-system-concept.jpg?fit=1200%2C800&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/01\/0American-Judiciary-system-concept.jpg?fit=1200%2C800&ssl=1&resize=525%2C300 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/01\/0American-Judiciary-system-concept.jpg?fit=1200%2C800&ssl=1&resize=700%2C400 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/01\/0American-Judiciary-system-concept.jpg?fit=1200%2C800&ssl=1&resize=1050%2C600 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":426787,"url":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=426787","url_meta":{"origin":390827,"position":4},"title":"Judge Rejects Climate Dogma, Begins to Restore Integrity","author":"uwe.roland.gross","date":"17\/02\/2026","format":false,"excerpt":"In a bold stroke against the pseudoscience of climate alarmism, U.S. District Judge Robin Rosenberg has removed a deeply flawed discussion on climate change from the fourth edition of the Reference Manual on Scientific Evidence.","rel":"","context":"In \"carbon dioxide (CO\u2082)\"","block_context":{"text":"carbon dioxide (CO\u2082)","link":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?tag=carbon-dioxide-co%e2%82%82"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/02\/0-Federal-Reference-Manual-on-Scientific-Evidence1.jpg?fit=784%2C1168&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/02\/0-Federal-Reference-Manual-on-Scientific-Evidence1.jpg?fit=784%2C1168&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/02\/0-Federal-Reference-Manual-on-Scientific-Evidence1.jpg?fit=784%2C1168&ssl=1&resize=525%2C300 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/02\/0-Federal-Reference-Manual-on-Scientific-Evidence1.jpg?fit=784%2C1168&ssl=1&resize=700%2C400 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":293677,"url":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=293677","url_meta":{"origin":390827,"position":5},"title":"America\u2019s judiciary is quietly receiving \u2018training\u2019 from leftwing climate group","author":"uwe.roland.gross","date":"03\/01\/2024","format":false,"excerpt":"With Enlightenment came secularism, with secularism came relativism, with relativism came leftism, and with leftism comes judicial activism. No longer are Western courts viewed as a place of arbitration based upon absolute Judeo-Christian morality and standards of justice, but a vehicle to enact revolutionary change, where fairness and righteousness are\u2026","rel":"","context":"In \"bureaucratic rules\"","block_context":{"text":"bureaucratic rules","link":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?tag=bureaucratic-rules"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/01\/00join-the-sith-lord-to-the-darkside-v0-hr77hu3m640a1.webp?fit=1200%2C623&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/01\/00join-the-sith-lord-to-the-darkside-v0-hr77hu3m640a1.webp?fit=1200%2C623&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/01\/00join-the-sith-lord-to-the-darkside-v0-hr77hu3m640a1.webp?fit=1200%2C623&ssl=1&resize=525%2C300 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/01\/00join-the-sith-lord-to-the-darkside-v0-hr77hu3m640a1.webp?fit=1200%2C623&ssl=1&resize=700%2C400 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/01\/00join-the-sith-lord-to-the-darkside-v0-hr77hu3m640a1.webp?fit=1200%2C623&ssl=1&resize=1050%2C600 3x"},"classes":[]}],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/390827","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/121246920"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=390827"}],"version-history":[{"count":4,"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/390827\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":390835,"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/390827\/revisions\/390835"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/media\/390832"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=390827"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=390827"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=390827"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}