UPDATE: Uh oh, looks like Mann will have to sue Investors Business Daily too, because they say that: It’s been the greatest fraud of all time, and Michael Mann has been at the heart of it.
UPDATE2: Climate Depot has an interesting editorial here
The bait. Popcorn futures just exploded.
From Michael E. Mann’s Facebook page:
People have been asking for my reaction to the recent response by the National Review. Here is a statement from my lawyer John B. Williams of Cozen O’Connor:
********
The response of the National Review is telling with respect to the issues it did not address. It did not address, or even acknowledge, the fact that Dr. Mann’s research has been extensively reviewed by a number of independent parties, including the National Science Foundation, with never a suggestion of any fraud or research misconduct. It did not address, or even acknowledge, the fact that Dr. Mann’s conclusions have been replicated by no fewer than twelve independent studies. It did not deny the fact that it was aware that Dr. Mann has been repeatedly exonerated of any fraudulent conduct. It did not deny the fact that it knew its allegations of fraud were false. Rather, the National Review’s defense seems to be that it did not really mean what it said last month when it accused Dr. Mann of fraud. Beyond this, the response is little more than an invective filled personal attack on Dr. Mann. And further, this attack is coupled with the transparent threat that the National Review intends to undertake burdensome and abusive litigation tactics should Dr. Mann have the temerity to attempt to defend himself in court.
*********
We intend to file a lawsuit.
===========================================
Read it on Dr. Mann’s Facebook page.
Go for it Mike, we all look forward to the enlightenment of discovery!
Tom Nelson: Do NOT miss this: Look who’s representing Michael Mann
He successfully defended R.J. Reynolds in the commercial speech case filed by the Federal Trade Commission challenging the cartoon character, Joe Camel.
I think Steyn just went to COSTCO with the NRO credit card to get the industrial strength size can of whupass he’ll be opening:
Yessssss!!
We ALL know that this lawsuit will NEVER happen , Mann has far too much to hide and if he’s forced to reveal his “research” and his “methodology” it will just backfire on him harder and nastier than standing behind a souped up pick up truck in a muddy field !!!
Where do we give donations for the defense?
At last! We finally pulled a sucker in. Bring out the popcorn and bring on the expert witnesses from both sides. Now this is what we can call a level playing field. 😉
His “Censored” directory alone is probably sufficient for NRO’s case.
Mark
Mann’s lawyer will have fun when it comes to interrogating the numerous people who have found Mann’s work wanting. And the NRO/Steyn lawyers will have a field day with the emails of Mann’s cronies. This will be theater worth watching. And a question for all you better versed in the law than I am, what happens to Mann’s lawsuit if he stalls turning over requested documents?
I trust that McIntyre, McKittrick and Wegman will be witnesses, along with others who have first hand knowledge of Mann’s deceptive shenanigans.
Ha ha hee hee
Oh boy, I HATE to throw away my hard earned $$$$…
But if the contribution to BURY R.E.P., was given GLADLY with SYMPATHY for his family was and was not thrown away. I can tell you…despite the (probable) higher cost to BURY M.M., it will be too will be well worth it, for other reasons. (Problem is, will he stay buried, or will he be like Dracula and keep coming back?)
One of the events (R.E.P. passing) was a cause for reflection, mourning, and sadness.
The “upcoming” event, however, will be a cause of hillarity, partying, and happiness.
Cosmic justice!
Congratulations! This will help everyone discover exactly who is lying.
“Go for it Mike, we all look forward to the enlightenment of discovery!”
I think people are very silly if they think someone can make accusation of another’s work being fraudulent and then use the discovery of a libel case to try and prove fraud.
It’s not that complicated: Has Doctor Mann’s work been shown to be fraudulent either in the eyes of his peers or by any official investigation? The answer to this is simply no.
A judge is extremely unlikely to look kindly on the argument “But his peers are also all frauds and all the investigations were rigged too! We simply must have unlimited access to Mann’s emails and notes just in case there’s some fraud in there!”
At best the NRO will be found to have not committed libel because it was worded slightly too vaguely or Mann’s public status will make it non-actionable.
“Fraud” is very difficult to prove in academia. Steyn should have used the word “incompetent”.
I’m unsure about the popcorn when all that corn is used for ethanol.
uh…before we get too giddy, remember that our “justice” system is terribly corrupted.
This will go down in history alongside Oscar Wildes decision to sue – that didn’t work out too well either!
Thank you Dr Mann!!
Careful, when the discovery phase is on – his dog will have eaten the hard drive. Or it is sub-judice in Virginia, or whatever other excuse. It would be really useful for anyone with wayback machine access or archives themselves to stand ready to supply the backup data he should have kept.
sharper00,
Explain why Mann hid this data. Because if he had used it, there would be no hockey stick. So he buried it in an ftp file labeled “censored”.
As a taxpayer, that appears to me to be fraud. What would you call it? Just throwing out any/all inconvenient data?
Tsk tsk… Be careful what you wish for! GK
Wow, it really seems like he’s going to pick up the hockey stick and fight…
Where is Mann getting the funding to pay his lawyer(s)?
That last sentence from his lawyers statement is the excuse Mann will use for not following through on his threat. Mann will say it’s not worth it.
Ooooh, I’d pay good money to see this – where to donate?
Wait. Won’t he just stall this case like he has the other two? How long can he stall a case for, anyway? Or maybe, as his research has been replicated so many times, his lawyer will happily hand over data and methods in discovery. What’s to hide, right?
Hmm. Remember OJ. Putting the question of whether Mann is a fraud in the hands of the lawyers is sadly a 50-50 coin spin.
Even if we all know exactly what he is.
“And further, this attack is coupled with the transparent threat that the National Review intends to undertake burdensome and abusive litigation tactics should Dr. Mann have the temerity to attempt to defend himself in court.”
No, discovery would be undertaken because the defense must get at his original working copies of his methods, raw data, and metadata. Also, the defense must get at Mann’s communications with Briffa and others about methods, raw data, and metadata.
As regards the so-called exonerations of Mann, all the defense would need is to read the questions that were asked of Mann by the organizations that exonerated him. Any collection of twelve jurors in the USA would find those questions good for some belly laughs.