Mann apologizes for defamation (sort of) after lawsuit threat

It’s a “jump the shark” moment for Mann.

As if taking a cue from yesterday’s essay The Merchants of Smear in deciding “enough is enough”, Herald Sun Journalist Andrew Bolt has decided to stand up to him for defamation. He did so in a most professional but firm way.  I repeat what he writes in:

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

Warning to Michael Mann: apologise for your lie or risk facing from me what you’ve done to Steyn

Open and shut case. Michael Mann is a liar:

image

Normally I do not sue, but this seems to me a special case.

Mann, the climate alarmist who gave the world his dodgy ”hockey stick”, is now suing sceptic Mark Steyn for mocking him and his lawyers have produced deceptive legal documents in his defence.

Mann has published an outright lie that defames me, and should face the same punishment he wishes to mete out on Steyn for mere mockery.

I do not lie and Murdoch does not pay me to do so. Nor has Mann singled out a single “lie” I’m alleged to have committed.

In fact, Mann is so reckless with the facts that his tweet links to an obvious parody Twitter account run by one of my critics, clearly believing that it’s actually mine.

Advice, please?

UPDATE

I have sent Mann the following email:

Dr Mann:I note your publication of the following defamatory tweet:

image

You have published an outright lie that defames me.

I do not lie and am not paid by Rupert Murdoch to lie. You have not identified in your tweet a single example of an alleged lie, which suggests you simply made up this defamatory claim.

Indeed, you were so reckless with the facts that your tweet links to an obvious parody Twitter account run by one of my critics which you have clearly believed is mine.

Your other link is to the website of a warmist journalist who for years was a Murdoch columnist, too, writing on climate change. Was he, too, paid by “villainous” Rupert Murdoch to “lie to public”?

I’ve since learned that you last year retweeted another defamatory comment: “No other media organisation in any other civilised nation would employ #AndrewBolt as a journalist”.

As it turns out, that, too, is incorrect. I am not only employed by News Corp but by Australia’s Network 10 and Macquarie Radio Network, where I host a weekly television show and co-host a daily radio show respectively. I have also appeared as a commentator on other media outlets, including the state-owned Australian Broadcasting Corporation, Al Jazeera, the BBC and Canadian radio stations. I am very confident I would be able to find work as a journalist in another “civilised nation”.

I note this because repeated defamations under Australia’s law is evidence of malice – and your history of defaming me shows a complete disregard for the facts.

It is appalling that you could be so reckless, so spiteful, so destructive and so ill-informed. I have long doubted the rigor and the conclusions of your work as a climate scientist and often deplored the way you conduct debate, but even I had never before today considered publically calling you a liar.

I demand you delete your tweet and issue a public apology on the same Twitter account within 24 hours. Failure to do so will not only cast doubt on your commitment to truth in debates on global warming, but expose you to legal action.

UPDATE

Mann gives a very grudging “not necessarily” apology for his brazen lie (and follows it up elsewhere with a string of insults):

image

Too late. His mask has slipped. What else has he repeated – whether “science” or personal calumnies – that was false and motivated by spite or self-protection?

Steve McIntyre suggests one more.

UPDATE

Now, how to get Mann to apologise for his “hockey stick” as well?

UPDATE

To help Mark Steyn meet the legal bills in his own legal battle with Mann, please go here and go to the final link.

5 1 vote
Article Rating

Discover more from Watts Up With That?

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

117 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
February 25, 2014 10:28 am

Michael Mann may have met his match. May need to man up or or do the Bolt.

RB
February 25, 2014 10:39 am

Richard Howes
My understanding, Richard, is that at this stage the only way to help Steyn is to buy stuff. Others have suggested buying a gift voucher and then never using it – I saw one ingenious chap say he’d bough a $200 gift voucher which he would never spend but keep as a momento of his having helped.

neasdenparade
February 25, 2014 10:51 am

The definition required to win a defamation case is a false statement made to two or more people that would lower your reputation in the eyes of a reasonable person (UK) or caused harm (US) basically. There is no defence of opinion for a direct unconfirmed statement such as ‘you are a liar, you are paid to lie, and Rupert Murdoch pays you to do so. This way he has libelled both of you (as permanent format) and you both have a pretty watertight case for libel but the costs involved are painful if you go ahead. I’d suggest a joint suit with Murdoch, who both has the resources and the will to act, I may not be a scientist in these areas but do have a law degree.

Chad Wozniak
February 25, 2014 10:57 am

I say, Mark Steyn and Andrew Bolt, go for the jugular (figuratively, of course) on the Womann-named-Sue. She certainly has it coming. But be careful, even her blood probably stinks.

Richard D
February 25, 2014 11:09 am

Mark Bofill says: February 25, 2014 at 7:39 am
Sometimes it seems like Mann spends half his day suing people for defaming him, and then the other half of his day defaming others on twitter.
Judith Curry nailed this one.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++
That’s a great post Mark Bofill. J Curry has really pertinent things to say regarding Mann’s legal adventures and proclivities for those who missed it. http://judithcurry.com/2014/02/22/steyn-et-al-versus-mann/
It’s great to see pushback by skeptics. I suppose his public communications are being watched carefully and all of his past available communications have been vetted by Steyn’s lawyers.
Standing order: if libeled by Michael E. Mann send demand letter and SUE if he’s not responsive.

Richard D
February 25, 2014 11:25 am

Richard Howes says: February 25, 2014 at 9:22 am
or does Mark have to do it himself for legal reasons?
___________________________________
Steyn writes over on his website that he didn’t want a legal defense fund as he anticipated going on the offensive :).

February 25, 2014 11:41 am

Mann’s behavior seems to be representative of other warmists as well – they say things & act as if they are above the law – because they are so convinced that they are right they absolutely can’t conceive that anyone else could be right & obviously deeply believe they have to save the earth from humanity, at any cost.
Look at the “climate ugliness” category on WUWT & look at how many of the key figures on the warmist side are involved in similar behavior. It’s stunning & sad when you review.
This is not about science. This is a crusade. This is blind faith. Mann’s latest outburst clearly illustrates this.
For skeptics, it’s a mindset that is tough to fight with science, which is generally how skeptics like to operate.
Anyone with a background in psychology care to expand / analyze this behavior ?

cba
February 25, 2014 12:04 pm

this pattern of behavior makes me wonder if it would be worthwhile doing a statistical analysis evaluation of mann’s dissertation. Seems like it might have been heavily associated with using the montecarlo technique. Judging by his personality and recent record, it might be very worthwhile to go through it and determine if it is totally fraudulent or flat out in gross error. If right, this would seal mann’s fate both in court and academia.

Henry Galt.
February 25, 2014 12:07 pm

Jeff L says:
February 25, 2014 at 11:41 am “”””
It’s not just that.
Their arses are covered by every government department, every once-venerable society and every aspect of the mainstream media. They will not be called out by these arms of the state.
They feel invulnerable due to such cover. This makes the less savoury ones bolshy and worse.

margaret berger
February 25, 2014 12:16 pm

I would like to contribute to the defense fund. That being said I do a lot of things old school. I need an address to mail a contribution. Could you please post one?

SasjaL
February 25, 2014 12:35 pm

Failure to do so will not only cast doubt on your commitment to truth in debates on global warming, …”
Too late …

Adam
February 25, 2014 12:40 pm

I don’t think that either Bolt or Mann can claim to not be public figures. It is difficult to see how any judge will take any of this seriously. Perhaps he will fine everyone involved for wasting the courts time?

February 25, 2014 12:44 pm

In the end its that famous email “Mike’s trick and hide the decline” that is really going to bring down the edifice of AGW! So whoever released them will be the hero of the day.

Tom in Florida
February 25, 2014 12:52 pm

Obviously Mann must be trying to set the stage for an insanity plea. Why else would anyone under scrutiny tweet such a thing.

Jimbo
February 25, 2014 12:54 pm

Me thinks that Michael ‘rain gauge’ Mann has a nasty habit of digging holes for himself. His lawyers must be fuming.
Why doesn’t he sue Andrew Bolt for accusing Mann of publishing a defamatory an “outright lie”?

Merovign
February 25, 2014 12:58 pm

How could that possibly be an apology? It repeats the baseless charge. It’s the equivalent of saying “I apologize for calling that liar a liar.”

February 25, 2014 12:59 pm

I have to wonder how often Dr. Mann gets phone calls from his lawyers saying “Stop attacking people on Twitter! You are blowing your case!”.

“So? I’m saving the planet. Sheesh, priorities!

Dave N
February 25, 2014 12:59 pm

Mann is obviously a person of honesty and rigor who checks his facts before making anything public.
/sarc
It’s just a shame that supreme lack of professionalism isn’t weeded out of the scientific community; Mann deserves no respect as a scientist.

Roger Dewhurst
February 25, 2014 1:16 pm

Never, never threaten. If the need arises to kick someone in the balls never warn him first.

Richard D
February 25, 2014 1:19 pm

Just a hunch 🙂
Narcissistic Personality Disorder: http://behavenet.com/node/21653

Melbourne Resident
February 25, 2014 1:48 pm

I have long admired Andrew Bolt for his up-front stance on the AGW scam – which goes way back to the Al Gore inconvenient truth days, and collected many of Andrew’s articles on the subject. He has been pointing out the nonsense in the Alarmist’s position since day one and I hope he will continue to do so until the beast is slain. I doubt that Andrew’s job is in more danger than Mann’s.

JCR
February 25, 2014 2:01 pm

It’s kind of a shame that Mann has sort-of apologised. What a dingo! I’d have enjoyed watching Rupert Murdoch going after him.

Richard Howes
February 25, 2014 2:02 pm

margaret berger says:
February 25, 2014 at 12:16 pm
I would like to contribute to the defense fund. That being said I do a lot of things old school. I need an address to mail a contribution. Could you please post one?
Margaret
From Mark’s website:
Please make them payable to SteynOnline and mail to Box 30, Woodsville, NH 03785, United States of America.

DDP
February 25, 2014 2:52 pm

I would not have requested an apology, and I sure as hell wouldn’t accept one even if he were gracious enough to admit being wrong and issue one.
Mann would have found out when his monthly legal bills showed a distinct hockey stick appearance.

February 25, 2014 3:20 pm

Richard D says:
February 25, 2014 at 11:25 am
Steyn writes over on his website that he didn’t want a legal defense fund as he anticipated going on the offensive :).

So, can I/we contribute to his legal offense fund?
🙂

Verified by MonsterInsights