Michael Mann, creator of the infamous global warming
’hockey stick,’ loses lawsuit against climate skeptic, ordered to pay
Michael Mann, a climatologist at Penn State
University, is the creator of the “hockey stick graph“ that appears to
show global temperatures taking a noticeable swing upward in the era
when humanity has been burning fossil fuels and dumping CO2 into the
atmosphere. The graph was first published in 1998, was prominently
featured in the 2001 U.N. Climate Report, and formed part of Al Gore’s
2006 movie An Inconvenient Truth.
The graph’s methodology and accuracy have been and
continue to be hotly contested, but Mann has taken the tack of suing two
of his most prominent critics for defamation or libel. One case,
against Mark Steyn, is called by Steyn likely to end up in the Supreme
Court. But another case, against Dr. Tim Ball, was decided by the
Supreme Court of British Columbia, with Mann’s case thrown out, and him
ordered to pay the defendant’s legal costs, no doubt a tidy sum of
money. News first broke in Wattsupwiththat, via an email Ball sent to
Anthony Watts. Later, Principia-Scientific offered extensive details,
including much background on the hockey stick.
The Canadian court issued it’s [sic] final ruling in
favor of the Dismissal motion that was filed in May 2019 by Dr Tim
Ball’s libel lawyers.
Not only did the court grant Ball’s application for
dismissal of the nine-year, multi-million dollar lawsuit, it also took
the additional step of awarding full legal costs to Ball. A detailed
public statement from the world-renowned skeptical climatologist is
expected in due course.
This extraordinary outcome is expected to trigger
severe legal repercussions for Dr Mann in the U.S. and may prove fatal
to climate science claims that modern temperatures are “unprecedented.”
Dr Mann lost his case because he refused to show in
open court his R2 regression numbers (the ’working out’) behind the
world-famous ’hockey stick’ graph[.]
Real science, not the phony “consensus” version,
requires open access to data so skeptics (who play a key role in
science) can see if results are reproducible. Of course, there are no
falsifiable experimental data associated with the global warming
predictions of doom, so it doesn’t really stand as science as Karl
Popper defined it.
This is an important victory in the process of debunking the warmist scare.
Update 1: Michael Mann disputes the notion that he lost (and more):
There have been some wildly untruthful claims about
the recent dismissal of libel litigation against Tim Ball circulating on
social media. Here is our statement (https://t.co/8tGoBZnE3Y):
— Michael E. Mann (@MichaelEMann) August 23, 2019
Update 2: Technology.news has a rather different take from Mann’s, noting that further legal steps are on their way.
Penn State climate scientist, Michael ’hockey stick’
Mann commits contempt of court in the ’climate science trial of the
century.’ Prominent alarmist shockingly defies judge and refuses to
surrender data for open court examination. Only possible outcome: Mann’s
humiliation, defeat and likely criminal investigation in the U.S.
The defendant in the libel trial, the 79-year-old
Canadian climatologist, Dr Tim Ball … is expected to instruct his
British Columbia attorneys to trigger mandatory punitive court
sanctions, including a ruling that Mann did act with criminal intent
when using public funds to commit climate data fraud. Mann’s imminent
defeat is set to send shock waves worldwide within the climate science
community as the outcome will be both a legal and scientific vindication
of U.S. President Donald Trump’s claims that climate scare stories are a
Michael Mann, who chose to file what many consider to
be a cynical SLAPP (Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation)
libel suit in the British Columbia Supreme Court, Vancouver six long
years ago, has astonished legal experts by refusing to comply with the
court direction to hand over all his disputed graph’s data. Mann’s
iconic hockey stick has been relied upon by the UN’s IPCC and western
governments as crucial evidence for the science of ’man-made global
The negative and unresponsive actions of Dr Mann and
his lawyer, Roger McConchie, are expected to infuriate the judge and be
the signal for the collapse of Mann’s multi-million dollar libel suit
against Dr Ball. It will be music to the ears of so-called ’climate
deniers’ like President Donald Trump and his EPA Chief, Scott Pruitt.
As Dr Ball explains:
“Michael Mann moved for an adjournment of the trial
scheduled for February 20, 2017. We had little choice because Canadian
courts always grant adjournments before a trial in their belief that an
out of court settlement is preferable. We agreed to an adjournment with
conditions. The major one was that he [Mann] produce all documents
including computer codes by February 20th, 2017. He failed to meet the
Punishment for Civil Contempt
Mann’s now proven contempt of court means Ball is
entitled to have the court serve upon Mann the fullest punishment.
Contempt sanctions could reasonably include the judge ruling that Dr.
Ball’s statement that Mann “belongs in the state pen, not Penn. State’
is a precise and true statement of fact. This is because under Canada’s
unique ’Truth Defense’, Mann is now proven to have wilfully hidden his
data, so the court may rule he hid it because it is fake. As such, the
court must then dismiss Mann’s entire libel suit with costs awarded to
Ball and his team.
To my US buddies… …from Bruce Wiseman… It was the ultra-liberal UK politician, Aneurin Bevan, who is credited with some of the most astute observation of politics ever uttered. It seems odd that Bevan, whose politics were somewhat left of Mao, had a philosophy not unlike the pragmatism of Socrates. It was Bevan who uttered the famous, (or is it infamous?) quote that “Politics is Blood sport.” It is a statement whose apparent truth is manifest today more than at any other time in United States history except perhaps the election of Andrew Jackson in 1832 and Jackson’s war against the Central Bank of the United States, (which he won). There are those that have compared Trump to Jackson. There are parallels. Jackson’s elimination of the Second Central Bank of the United States, backed as it was by the Rothschilds, greatly benefitted the country throughout the expansive 19th century. It was not until 1913 when Rockefeller-connected and other international bankers, including Rothschild representatives, managed to force the Federal Reserve Act through Congress in 1913. This established a central bank for the United States – an event that should go down in history as one of the most destructive pieces of legislation in the history of the American Republic. And while Bevan’s politics were clearly far left, his wisdom is apparent by some of his other statements. “I read the newspapers avidly. It is my one form of continuous fiction.” And “The purpose of getting power is to be able to give it away.” But it is his quote that “Politics is Blood sport” that so resonates in today’s political climate. It is the most contentious of times and, within this age of political warfare, surveys are being weaponized as instruments of war. As recently as May of this year even the most partisan Democrats seeking to destroy Trump and his administration were clear that this would not happen without broad public support (as reflected in polls). As if on command, the media picked up the call. With 91% of the press pounding the public on impeachment, the polls now show a 10% increase in those supporting impeachment. As those numbers have risen, Nancy Pelosi has used them to authorize an impeachment inquiry in the House, though the current surveys vary by as much as 8%. Indeed, we have written before and repeat here, political polls are highly unreliable / inaccurate. There is no better example than the 2016 presidential election. But I am writing here in opposition to their use as tools of “War.” Their better use is to help businesses flourish and prosper. But Nancy got what she wanted: higher poll numbers, and responded by authorizing the impeachment inquiry and giving the impeachment ball to Adam Schiff, a Congressman who actually created a false version of Trump’s call to the Ukrainian President out of whole-cloth and read it to the American public as fact, later back pedaling that he was “just being sarcastic”. Predicting politics is a fool’s errand, especially when based on political polls; but I take it here, understanding the risk: the Democratic control of the House, with the impeachment now coming under the control of Adam “The Dark Knight” Schiff raises the prospect of the impeachment of the President. That polls / surveys have been used to manipulate this result is a mistaken use of this tool. And maybe the light of reason will break through the clouds of acrimony and bring some political peace to our nation. But political passion runs deep and it will take considerable political pressure to return some sense of reason to Congress. You can and should let your federal legislators know how you feel about this circus. Demand that they return a sense of civility to Congress. I know, it’s pretty noisy out there, but I have personally seen legislators change behavior (and votes) with enough pressure from their constituents. It’s our government. Let’s take responsibility for it. Contact your members of Congress here: https://www.contactingcongress.orgBest,Bruce Bruce WisemanPresident & CEOOn Target Researchwww.ontargetresearch.comBruce@brucewiseman.net1-818-397-1401