This just in. Here’s a potential bombshell for the Mann:
========================================================
Popcorn futures* continue their unprecedented climb:
UPDATE: Sunday 10/28 Mark Steyn writes an uproariously funny but at the same time stinging evisceration of Dr. Mann on his private website titled The fraudulent Nobel Laureate
This part says it all, I’d make it “Quote of the Week”, but then I don’t want to fragment this thread:
When a man sues for damage to his reputation and grossly inflates that reputation in the very court filings, that says something about his credibility.
He also links to this thoughtful essay by Dr. Roger Pielke Jr.
Mann’s embellishment has placed him in a situation where his claims are being countered by the Nobel organization itself.
*There are no popcorn futures markets, the graph is based on a corn future market graph, just for fun
Read Steyn’s latest here: The fraudulent Nobel Laureate
============================================================
Mark Steyn takes note of the airbrushing going on in Mike’s Nobel Trick:
A week ago, Michael Mann accused us of damaging his reputation – and seems to have made it a self-fulfilling prophecy. A week ago, he was a “Nobel prize recipient”. Now he’s not. Great work, Mike!
Dr. Judith Curry sends some advice in her week in review:
“JC message to Michael Mann: Mark Steyn is [a] formidable opponent. I suspect that this is not going to turn out well for you.”
Read more at JudithCurry.com
————————————————————–
FLASH: 10/26 7:30AM The Nobel committee responds to Mann’s “certificate”, says he can’t claim he won it (the Nobel prize itself).
See below. – ALSO National Review makes phone call to Nobel committee, audio and transcript below.
NOTE: This is a top sticky post for awhile since the interest is high. New stories appear below this one. UPDATE – legal complaint added, plus a new opinion piece by Chris Horner regarding claims of exoneration has been added – see below the “continue reading” line. UPDATE2: Steyn responds, see below.
UPDATE 3: Steyn responds even further, saying:
“Over the years, I’ve been sued and threatened with suits in various countries around the world but I’ve never before seen a plaintiff make such a transparently false assertion right up front in the biographical resumé.”
Details (and a photo to back up Steyn) below.
UPDATE4: CEI officially responds to the lawsuit, and Steyn mocks Mann even more with a priceless zinger, see below.
In related news, popcorn futures explode go nuclear.
More details to follow.
From Michael Mann’s Facebook page.
Lawsuit filed against The National Review and the Competitive Enterprise Institute 10/22/12
Today, the case of Dr. Michael E. Mann vs. The National Review and The Competitive Enterprise Institute was filed in the Superior Court of the District of Columbia. Dr. Mann, a Professor and Director of the Earth System Science Center at Pennsylvania State University, has instituted this lawsuit against the two organizations, along with two of their authors, based upon their false and defamatory statements accusing him of academic fraud and comparing him to a convicted child molester, Jerry Sandusky. Dr. Mann is being represented by John B. Williams of the law firm of Cozen O’Connor in Washington, D.C. (http://www.cozen.com/attorney_detail.asp?d=1&atid=1406).
Dr. Mann is a climate scientist whose research has focused on global warming. In 2007, along with Vice President Al Gore and his colleagues of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, he was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize for having “created an ever-broader informed consensus about the connection between human activities and global warming.”
Nevertheless, the defendants assert that global warming is a “hoax,” and have accused Dr. Mann of improperly manipulating the data to reach his conclusions.
In response to these types of accusations, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, the National Science Foundation and seven other organizations have conducted investigations into Dr. Mann’s work, finding any and all allegations of academic fraud to be baseless. Every investigation—and every replication of Mann’s work—has concluded that his research and conclusions were properly conducted and fairly presented.
Despite their knowledge of the results of these many investigations, the defendants have nevertheless accused Dr. Mann of academic fraud and have maliciously attacked his personal reputation with the knowingly false comparison to a child molester. The conduct of the defendants is outrageous, and Dr. Mann will be seeking judgment for both compensatory and punitive damages.
Journalists interested in further information regarding the filing of this lawsuit may contact Dr. Mann’s attorney at 202-912-4848, or jbwilliams@cozen.com.
==============================================================
I’m sure Mark Steyn is thrilled with the prospect of now being able to do additional commentary on this side show. I can’t wait for depositions and discovery.
UPDATES:
Here is the legal complaint: http://legaltimes.typepad.com/files/michael-mann-complaint.pdf
Chris Horner has this opinion piece now which explains his opinion on why Dr. Michael Mann was never fully investigated and thus never exonerated.
Mark Steyn responds with: I’ll have more to say about this when I’ve stopped laughing.
Mark Steyn writes in a further update:
Actually, it’s worse than that. I’ve just read the official indictment or whatever you call it against NR, and he makes the claim that he has been “awarded the Nobel Peace Prize” in the complaint itself (page 2, paragraph 2).
Over the years, I’ve been sued and threatened with suits in various countries around the world but I’ve never before seen a plaintiff make such a transparently false assertion right up front in the biographical resumé.
And I’ve got the photo of Dr. Mann’s award (shown from his office window) to back up what Steyn says here.
Note it says “for contributing to” not awarded to.
Be careful, don’t choke on your popcorn while laughing.
UPDATE4:
CEI has released it’s official statement on the lawsuit on their website here: http://cei.org/news-releases/climate-scientist-sues-cei
The say:
One of our attorneys, Bruce D. Brown of Baker Hostetler, expertly laid out the legal arguments against Mann’s defamation claim. In short, Dr. Mann is a public figure, and under libel law he would need to meet an exceedingly high standard to prevail. Given the support that Simberg’s criticisms rest on, that standard simply can’t be met. As for Simberg’s Sandusky metaphor, it was purely that—a metaphor.
They are also inviting readers to comment on the CEI Facebook page: https://www.facebook.com/CompetitiveEnterpriseInstitute/posts/428205930566869
Meanwhile, Mark Steyn whips out an example of his rapier wit over Mann’s “Nobel Prize” claims (see photo above) writing:
On the one hand, Michael Mann’s own web page:
He shared the Nobel Peace Prize with other IPCC authors in 2007.
On the other, the Nobel committee:
Only persons named explicitly in the citation may claim to share a Nobel Prize.
So we’re being sued for loss of reputation by a fake Nobel laureate. Hilarious.
=============================================================
FLASH The Nobel committee responds to Mann’s “certificate” From Tom Richard at Climate Change Dispatch and at The Examiner
I contacted the The Norwegian Nobel Institute to find out if Mann was indeed a Nobel Laureate, winner, etc…
…snip…
Geir Lundestad, Director, Professor, or The Norwegian Nobel Institute emailed me back with the following:
1) Michael Mann has never been awarded the Nobel Peace Prize.
2) He did not receive any personal certificate. He has taken the diploma awarded in 2007 to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (and to Al Gore) and made his own text underneath this authentic-looking diploma.
3) The text underneath the diploma is entirely his own. We issued only the diploma to the IPCC as such. No individuals on the IPCC side received anything in 2007.
(NOTE: on point 3, another example here (PDF) suggests that the IPCC added that text, not Mann – Anthony)
Lundestad goes on to say that, “Unfortunately we often experience that members of organizations that have indeed been awarded the Nobel Peace Prize issue various forms of personal diplomas to indicate that they personally have received the Nobel Peace Prize. They have not.”
Full story at Climate Change Dispatch and at The Examiner
=================================================================
ALSO: From NRO’s “The Corner” a call to the Nobel committee by Charles C. W. Cooke:
TRANSCRIPT
Cooke: Hello there, do you speak English?
Nobel Committee: Yes, can I help you?
Cooke: I’m a writer. I’m wondering if I could ask you about previous winners of the Nobel Peace Prize?
Nobel Committee: Oh, could you speak a little bit louder. It’s difficult for me to hear.
Cooke: Sorry. I’m trying to look for some information about previous winners of the Nobel Peace Prize.
Nobel Committee: Which one?
Cooke: I was wondering, has Dr. Michael Mann ever won the Nobel Peace Prize?
Nobel Committee: No, no. He has never won the Nobel prize.
Cooke: He’s never won it?
Nobel Committee: No.
Cooke: Oh, it says on his-
Nobel Committee: The organization won it. It’s not a personal prize to people belonging to an organization.
Cooke: Okay. So if I were to write that he’d won it, that would be incorrect?
Nobel Committee: That is incorrect, yes. Is it you that sent me an email today? I got an e-mail from our Stockholm office regarding Michael Mann.
Cooke: Oh. No, I didn’t send you an e-mail.
Nobel Committee: Oh. So what’s your name?
Cooke: My name is Charles Cooke.
Nobel Committee: And you work for?
Cooke: I write for National Review.
Nobel Committee: Okay, because I’ve got something from Boston and NY Mental Examiner that asked about the same thing.
Cooke: Oh, okay. Well maybe this is a big question. Okay, but he hasn’t won it. That is the answer.
Nobel Committee: No, he has not won it at all.
Cooke: Okay. Perfect. Thank you very much.
Nobel Committee: Thank you. You’re welcome. Bye bye.
Kev-in-Uk:
re your post at October 26, 2012 at 8:16 am .
Mann is not a nob, he is a prat.
To save the non-English difficulty in understanding “prat”, I repeat the link Pointman provided to his amusing and excellent explanation.
http://thepointman.wordpress.com/2012/05/18/climate-alarmism-and-the-prat-principle/
Richard
Is his law team doing better than Sandusky’s, so far ?
There are people who truly believe that if they think it up (make it up) then it must be true. Just because you don’t understand their thought process, only means that you are at fault. There are a large number of people in education, business and, yes, politics that fall in to this group – Thinking Up Reality Dilution (TURD). You can usually identify them by their very long arms — the ones they use to pat themselves on the back. The other clear identifying characteristic is the squinty eyes and sharp smirk when they must deal with others who don’t agree with them or who refuse to drink their cool aid. The other key characteristic of their being is that truth is fungible and may be molded to support whatever idea they thought up in the shower that morning. I will leave it to the readers to determine where the characters like Mann fit in the TURD group.
C’mon…..it was a ‘Peace’ prize, and FNLMM misunderstood. He thought it was a piece prize…..so he took a piece!
Maybe Mann could show a fake receipt of his share of the prize money.
Isn’t Michael Mann in fact, “comparing himself” to the President of the United States here ?
Isn’t it *saying* he is like the President?
Cozen me up on this.
Courtroom scene from The Caine Mutiny (one of the all time great Humphrey Bogart films):
http://youtu.be/ZlV3oQ3pLA0
Is there a Captain Queeg Moment in Mann’s future? He’s drawing perilously close to the edge.
So… with the statement of the Nobel committee (Flash Update above) does that mean that Mann is going to widen his lawsuit to include The Norwegian Nobel Institute?
There is a difference between ignorance and being idioticy.
Ignorance is a lack of knowing and can be cured by education.
Idioticy while it may be temporary, it is always incurable and has no relationship to education.
Dr Mann is a well educated idiot.
Someone should inform him that the first action to take when finding oneself in a hole is to stop digging.
I read with some amusement (and some frustration, too) the back-and-forth between Richard Courtney and Phil. On one point, Phil is correct to say that Mann in his 98 hockey stick paper didn’t use Briffa’s divergent data. But it’s wrong of Phil to then conclude that the divergence problem doesn’t have anything to do with Mann. The term “Mike’s Nature Trick” derives from Mann’s exclusion of a PORTION of Briffa’s proxy record during the entire late 20th century warming period, which PORTION would have shown the divergence problem in Mann’s paper, too. This exclusion shows Mann to be cherry picking, and intentionally hiding a known source of contradictory information. Mann should have excluded the ENTIRE proxy (in which case, he might not have had enough data on which to base a long recontruction), or included the ENTIRE proxy, which would have shown the divergence problem, and he’d have to deal with that problem in his analysis. In either case, since the whole point of his paper was to DO a multi-proxy temperature reconstruction, this proxy and it’s attendent problems should have been mentioned by Mann, even if he didn’t use it.
A defense attorney in court is not expected to point out the incriminating evidence against his client. Science, however, is not advocacy. It doesn’t (or isn’t supposted to) work that way. But in “Real” Climate Scientology, Mann is praised for his advocacy and deception by his peers. They wonder how they can emulate him. And they have, from Josh Willis’ deletion of Argo float data that was “too cold to be believable” (maybe it’s true, but no effort to document malfunctioning equipment seems to back up the deletion) to Joelle Gergis’ picking of only those proxy data that will show hockey sticks in her recently withdrawn paper..
No wonder they’re losing this debate.
So as the text says “Presented to”, then who presented it to him? Himself in a mirror? This Mann is an embarassment to true science.
http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/331738/michael-manns-false-nobel-claim-charles-c-w-cooke#
More from the Nobel Institute, via phone conversation, with Mr Cook of the National Review.
Do they want my birth certif too?
People who believe their own bullshit are never wrong (in their own mind).
The certificate came out of an IPCC computer. Therefore it must be valid (in Mann’s mind).
Michael Mann strikes me as a person who has a mental illness.
Hey, thanks Mikey Mann for your Nobel Prize delusions . . . now I realize that I am also a Nobel Prize winner too. Yeah, Obama as a US president got the Nobel Prize and since I am US citizen it means I got the Nobel Prize too. : )
John,
The Nobel Prize Recipiant (of the Mannian Order of Nobel Prize Delusionists)
“Fake but accurate”
Mann’s certificate clearly states that it is from the IPCC to Mann for his contribution. It is not from the Nobel Committee.
A recipient of the Nobel Prize cannow bestow a Nobel, a “co-Nobel” or a “sub-Nobel” on contributors.
It’s nothing more than a “employee of the year” award. In my experience, people that fabricate such grandiose accolades about themselves have low self-esteem. They lie so that they can feel good about themselves. If Mann really believes the lie, well that was covered in my previous post.
Liars aren’t called liars because they lie. Liar’s lie because, at their very core, they are liars.
If he would lie about a Nobel, he will lie about anything. And everything.
Wow. The Nobel institution have thwarted Mann’s claim to the Nobel peace prize. They need to watch out now they are probably on his ”to sue” list.
Re the Flash:
This is curious: “He has taken the diploma awarded in 2007 to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (and to Al Gore) and made his own text underneath this authentic-looking diploma.”
Didn’t Pachauri send out those certificates to IPCC contributors? Or have I got that wrong. Still, it’s nice to see the Nobel Committee responding forcefully on this.
Using MIke’s Nobel Trick I just got inducted into the Baseball Hall of Fame and am soon to be knighted (waiting for my certificate to finish printing on my inkjet). I shall hereby be known as Baseball Hall of Famer Sir Reginald Nelson.
Oops. Climate Depot is backing off the “he edited” assertion – one that the Nobel committee also assumed. Looks like that certificate was issued by IPCC as-is. Still – he’s no NP recipient.
Mickey Reno:
I write to thank you for your post at October 26, 2012 at 9:03 am which says
Yes, you are correct.
My short summary was not precise on that point which I consider to be a point of detail although – as you say – it would need to be spelled-out in the court case.
Richard
Duke C. says:
“Is there a Captain Queeg Moment in Mann’s future? He’s drawing perilously close to the edge”
We could send Mann some ball bearings so that he will have them handy when needed.
Oh my, not another Mannifestation!