Listen in on Mike Mann’s legal wranglings at AGU

Steve McIntyre reports that the AGU is schlepping for Dr. Mann’s legal defense with a live audio webcast:

An Inside Look at the Michael Mann Case
Featuring Peter Fontaine, counsel to Michael Mann and a leader of Cozen O’Connor’s Brownfield Development and Climate Change practices

To join the meeting:

http://agu.adobeconnect.com/legalwebinar2/

• Please login as a guest with your first and last name. The meeting does not require a password. The meeting hosts will authorize you to enter the meeting.
• We recommend you use the audio on your computer. You will be able to hear the presentation and ask questions via a chat box.

=============================================================

I find this really, really, strange that the AGU would be sponsoring such a meeting. For those of you thinking about bailing out of AGU membership, this is probably your cue.

In an ironic twist, another Peter Fontaine (the actor, not the lawyer) was in this movie:

The Strange Case of Dr. Manning (1957)

About these ads
This entry was posted in Michael E. Mann and tagged , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

22 Responses to Listen in on Mike Mann’s legal wranglings at AGU

  1. theduke says:

    Peter Fontaine:

    http://www.cozen.com/attorney_detail.asp?atid=610

    When it comes to climate and the environment, he’s done it all.

  2. theduke says:

    What time does the thing start? I won’t be able to listen in, so if anyone does and write up a report on it, that would be nice.

  3. eqibno says:

    Gene Wahl: Can you review again the exemption you mentioned at UVA?

    No surprise with that request…

  4. eqibno says:

    Gene Wahl: Can you review again the exemption you mentioned at UVA?

    No surprise with that request…

  5. Mike Bromley the Canucklehead says:

    Gawd, how tacky.

  6. nc says:

    Read this along the same line, Italian scientists sentenced for their earthquake prediction. I wonder if Mann and company will be looking over their shoulders?

    http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/story/2012/10/22/italy-earthquake-scientists-trial.html?cmp=rss

  7. AnonyMoose says:

    Is that this event?

    5 December 2012 from 12:30 – 1:30PM

    http://fallmeeting.agu.org/2012/events/an-inside-look-at-the-michael-mann-case/

  8. Jeff D. says:

    If climate scientist were held to the Italian standard ” http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-20025626 ” I am sure things they spit out of their mouth would be much different.

  9. cui bono says:

    Six years in jail Mikey. Quaking yet?

  10. theduke says:

    Anoneumouse: that’s a rather strong argument in favor of the precautionary principle.

    IF we are all roasting in global warming hell in ten or twenty years, will skeptics be held liable?

    It’s amazing to me that a judge could sentence people for relying on the best knowledge available, if that is indeed what the scientists in question did.

    If they had predicted a catastrophic quake and none occurred, would they be held responsible for the expense of moving all the people out of the region in question?

  11. JJ says:

    Jeff D. says:

    If climate scientist were held to the Italian standard ” http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-20025626 ” I am sure things they spit out of their mouth would be much different.

    No.

    You will probably see them referring to the Italian standard in support of their alarmism. The Italian scientists were convicted for NOT telling scary stoires.

  12. TomRude says:

    AGU… Shame on you!

  13. Jeff Mitchell says:

    If you want to apply the precautionary principle to skeptics if it gets hot, I hope you are equally in favor of applying it to the alarmists if it gets cold instead. What do you do if mitigating global warming starts an ice age? There is no way to “err on the side of caution” in such a case. The skeptics can argue the need to pump CO2 into the atmosphere to prevent the coming ice age on the same basis.

  14. theduke says:

    I agree with Jeff Mitchell. The whole idea of holding scientists liable for acts of nature because they couldn’t accurately predict nature based on the extent of human knowledge at the time is nothing more than judicial Stalinism.

    The judge ought to be dis-robed.

  15. Political Junkie says:

    Cozen O’Connor is a peculiar name, but one sees why Mann was attracted to this law firm!
    Here’s a dictionary definition of “cozen.”
    v.tr.
    1. To mislead by means of a petty trick or fraud; deceive.
    2. To persuade or induce to do something by cajoling or wheedling.
    3. To obtain by deceit or persuasion.
    v.intr.
    To act deceitfully.

  16. Paul in Sweden says:

    Seismologists clearly state the uncertainty of their science. On the other hand, many Climate ‘scientists’ not only often claim 95-97 percent certainty in being able to predict our climate 100 years out but also claim to have the power to control our climate.

  17. Manfred says:

    “I find this really, really, strange that the AGU would be sponsoring such a meeting.”

    There may be a market for legal councelling among the membership.

    There have been accusations of bullying, conspiracy, violation of ethical standards, of codes of conduct, making untrue statements, research grant fraud etc. against AGU members.

    The fear may be that a government change may trigger investigations, or that this may even happen under the current administration, if a solar cycle triggered cooling world brings desaster to mankind.

  18. I would believe that we can thank the warmists for this outrageous sentence, as it is they who have bought Science into disrepute by their infamous manufactured models and endless misinformation (The Hockey Stick and Gore’s An Inconvenient Truth just to name two) both have been demonstrated to being economical with the truth. Yet we have another warmist drone claiming otherwise. It truly is incredible how they continue on their chosen path and keep bloviat-ing their inane and obviously dishonest religion akin to some lunatic sect member.
    The fact that the Planet has now NOT warmed for the last 16 years is conveniently ignored as they continue on their society destroying path in order to reduce a gas that comes in at .035 % of the atmospheric gases.
    They wonder why they have resistance to their lunatic claims. Fascinating.

  19. Brian H says:

    There’s a nuance to the Italian case. A mere lab tech, G., had been using radon releases to predict tremors, and was urgently trying to alert the public to an imminent event. The sentenced scientists and bureaucrat stifled him. That may have had as much to do with the conviction as anything.

  20. Mickey Reno says:

    Just to protect myself against all future Italian liability, I’d like to warn them RIGHT NOW that Mt. Vesuvius COULD erupt, and as such, I suggest that maybe they ought to stop urbanizing the kill zone which only a couple of thousand years ago, buried Pompeii.

    Just imagine the risk being incurred in that one spot. And then balance that against a desire by some to turn human beings into a world of collective crybabies because it “might” get a couple of degrees warmer. The mind boggles.

Comments are closed.