It seems Mark Steyn got tired of waiting for Dr. Michael Mann to finish the required legal discovery in that defamation lawsuit and has struck a blow in the form of a new book soon to be published. I wonder if we’ll see an attempt to block publication of this title: “A Disgrace To The Profession”. Yikes!
Steyn writes:
Some readers have asked for an update on the looming Mann vs Steyn trial of the century. I wish it were looming a bit more imminently, but apparently it would be unreasonable to expect the sclerotic District of Columbia courts to litigate a 270-word blog post in under 270 weeks.
As you know, Michael E Mann, the inventor of the global-warming “hockey stick”, the single most influential graphic in the history of climate alarmism, sued me for defamation for calling his ever more flaccid stick “fraudulent”. I had called it fraudulent in national publications in Britain, Canada and Australia at various times over the last 15 years, but the First Amendment apparently requires giving up five years in court and a seven-figure sum for the privilege of learning whether one can say the same thing in the United States. And, by the way, it is fraudulent: It abolished the very concept of “natural variability” and insisted that nothing happened in the global climate until the 20th century, and it did so using a handful of unreliable tree-rings processed through a statistical method fished out of a can of alphabet soup.
Right now, the case is stalled while the DC Court of Appeals decides whether their brand new anti-SLAPP law comes with a right of interlocutory appeal. Maybe it does, maybe it doesn’t. But as of now no one knows. I can’t tell you how thrilled I am to find that I’m a test case. At any rate, written briefs were filed last September and there was half-an-hour of oral argument in November, but apparently after seven months the judges are still no hurry to issue an opinion.
“A Disgrace To The Profession”
The World’s Scientists, In Their Own Words, On Michael E Mann, His Hockey Stick And Their Damage To Science
Volume I Compiled and edited by Mark Steyn
Do I expect you to publicly denounce the hockey stick as obvious drivel? Well, yes.
Jonathan Jones, Professor of Atomic and Laser Physics, University of Oxford
Michael Mann, Phil Jones and Stefan Rahmstorf should be barred …because the scientific assessments in which they may take part are not credible anymore.
Eduardo Zorita, Senior Scientist at Germany’s Institute for Coastal Research
Did Mann et al get it wrong? Yes, Mann et al got it wrong.
Simon Tett, Professor of Climate Science, University of Edinburgh
The defamation suit against Steyn by Michael E Mann, inventor of the global-warming “hockey stick”, is about to enter its fourth year at the DC Superior Court – which means Mark has a lot of case research lying around and he can’t wait forever for the trial to start. So he figured he’d put some of it in a new book, now available for pre-order exclusively from SteynOnline.
In the fall of 2014, not a single amicus brief was filed on Dr Mann’s behalf, not one. He claims he’s “taking a stand for science”, but evidently science is disinclined to take a stand for him.
That got Mark curious as to what actual scientists think of Mann, his famous hockey stick, and his other work. So he started looking – and the result is a rollicking collection of insights into Big Climate’s chief enforcer by scientists from around the world, from Harvard to Helsinki, Prague to Princeton, with commentary from Steyn telling the story of the rise to global celebrity of one Mann and his stick.
“A Disgrace To The Profession”: The World’s Scientists In Their Own Words On Michael E Mann, His Hockey Stick, And Their Damage To Science – Volume I will be published later this summer, but you can make sure you’re the first on your block with must-read book by pre-ordering your copy now exclusively from the SteynOnline bookstore. And as always Mark will be happy to autograph it personally for you or your warm-mongering loved one.
Available for pre-order
all I can say you are right and we all know you are right so we are all behind you Mark Steyn
The saddest thing is I think Mann really believes that the longer he waits the more he will be proved right when we all know that mother nature is a sceptic and the longer she’s given the more sceptical she becomes.
It seems that Mann wants a speedy resolution like he wants to debate climate change. I.e., not.
Good old Mark! Surely the world’s only impolite Canadian.
Well, Tim Ball can be a gruff. And i think I know why.
Ordered…
The American people should be getting very concerned with the way the legal system is deteriorating. It’s not good.
It’s not just Scientists, it’s a whole bunch of appointees and others in our Government not doing their jobs because they’re riding high and mighty on obamas socialist bandwagon and violating our rights and the Constitution whenever it suits them. I sincerely hope every single one of them who supported this fiasco gets fired and even prosecuted after 2016. Dictators do not belong here. Nor do their cronies.
I will buy the book.
It is nice to see something that may be the definitive critical work on how history will eventually judge Mann.
John
Judith had it right when she said to Mann (on her site) that Steyn is a formidable opponent. She did her homework and got it right. As usual.
Remember that this time’s different. This suit won’t just fade away into the ozone.Steyn has counter-sued for millions, and Mann can’t just drop that one to show what a good guy he is. Or settle it. Or limit Steyn’s other maneuvers. Nope
This time the mouse trap caught a bear.A bear who’s done this before.
The trap in which he is now caught, Mann set himself, which makes it all the better. Bullies usually can’t handle those who fight back.
I love Mark Steyn.
If Steyn wins, will Mann be liable for court costs?
He may. That’s up to the jury to decide. If Steyn wins, the jury determines what damages to award, including legal fees.
One other point, it’s not uncommon for civil cases to take several years. I was on jury duty many years ago and got called up on personal injury lawsuit. The incident had occurred nearly four years prior. The judge explained that the reason the case took so long to get to trial was because civil cases are a low priority compared to criminal trials. The reason being is that a criminal defendant has a right to “speedy” trial.
Reg. “That’s up to a jury to decide.”
I believe that the case is in front of an Appeals Court with a panel of judges. No jury.
@ur momisugly Dahlquist June 12, 2015 at 8:03 am
I was referring to when the case actually goes to trial. You are correct though theoretically there could be no jury and the judge could decide the case, but this almost never happens. Either side can request a jury trial and they always do. It’s harder to fool a judge than it is to fool a jury.
Dahlquist: What’s being appealed is a procedural decision by the trial court judge.
The case itself hasn’t gone to trial yet.
In a world full of disreputable men, Mann plumbs new lows of scum-infested, bottom-dwelling, disreputable, despicable behaviour. He isn’t even half a Mann.
God Love Mark Steyn! I just bought the new book and another item on his site that was the most expensive thing I could find. I think Steyn is brilliant and I just want to contribute the best I can to his effort against the Warmest onslaught.
Mark, where can we contribute directly to your defense?
You can buy his book, and copies for all your friends.
@MarkW & Reg
Thanks for the correction. Got it now.
Whether the judges issue an opinion in a timely manner, or take their sweet time, they still get paid the same.
I’ve said for years that the primary purpose of the legal system is to employ lawyers. (Judges are almost always lawyers.)
Don’t expect any decision until after Dec 2015 – when it would be too late to do much good.
It should not be lost that a very willing main stream press enabled (and continue to do so) the activities that led to this book. That is another book to be written, and a far more damning one, at that. Those publications and the authors who compiled such rubbish need to be held to account. May I suggest a title: “To Serve Mann”, to pull a hat trick from Damon Knight’s great short story – https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/To_Serve_Man_%28The_Twilight_Zone%29 with the telling ending: “It’s a crook book!”.
Try “Stonewalled”, by Sharyl Atkisson.
I did ,great book,
LOL x 97
errr— “It’s a cook book”
Did you hear a whooshing sound of humor going over your head when you typed that?
“Cook” was my first thought. My second thought was that it was correctly clever. (Typo – cleaver!)
Nice thought, but can you recollect any time, such a thing, has come to pass? GK
OK, granted this list of prosecutions for scientific misconduct in the US is from Wiki, but it includes citations of sources:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_misconduct#United_States
Punishments of various kinds have also been imposed for bogus research in other disciplines, such as history.
One can only hope.
I wonder if any of Mann’s media enablers like Chris Hayes, Bill Nye (wrote forward to new version of Mann’s book), Paul Krugman or Chris Mooney (lots of powder puff interviews) have ever taken a closer look at the hockey stick and started to cringe.
It would be nice if this was in Epub/mobi format – easier to read and link to rererences.
Or a new section that allows common OBSERVERS and input, just in case they have something really important for the scientist of the world to see or hear. (and im not talking about light show pictures).
“They are not scientists, just bad engineers. They didn’t discover global warming, they invented it out of whole cloth. And their machine doesn’t even work.” — Me
The warming was there to begin with as the planet recovered from the LIA. They just slapped an “explanation” on it with a bit of reasonable laboratory back up, generated models with tipping points that are mathematical artifacts, and then ran around like Chicken Little. Mann probably isn’t a fraud, simply a fool who believes his own opinions to the detriment of anyone who listens to him. There are many others just like him.
I believe that the Mann/Steyn legal process would not be an issue in the UK. Their tort law is based on the principal of “[loser] pays” cost plus damages. This greatly minimizes such law suits. Only those in which the plaintiff thinks he/she has a good chance of winning proceed. Looser pays would work equally well in the US but our trial lawyers would not allow it. They make huge amounts of money with frivolous law suits as I am well aware as an expert witness in some.
But then, there have been fictional and real law cases in the UK that dragged on, and on, and on…
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jarndyce_and_Jarndyce
Dickens “Jarndyce and Jarndyce” was an estate dispute, not a tort case. It is also fiction as you note. I am not aware of any UK tort cases with such a history, but I am not an authority on the matter
Mann has some third party supporting his side of the suit–this encourages outrageous behavior.
Love it!
http://a-sceptical-mind.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/01/Comparison-charts.jpg
Within the gray region of the hockey stick chart there is room for much of the chart on the left. The problem seems to be that few scientists of Mann’s caliber are willing to deal with ambiguity forthrightly; and the press, politicians and general laymen don’t understand it. Well, there is also the dishonest part about changing data source in the hockey stick chart without clear explanation, but a better appreciation of ambiguity would render that moot.
Kevin,
Actually, there isn’t.
The tip of the blade of Mann’s stick is far above even the gray region.\
It is pure, simple, unadulterated HS, as in horse manure.
The future is certain. It’s the past that keeps changing.
-Russian Proverb
Whatever happened to Manns suit against Tim Ball?
That must be over 5 years old.
Mark Steyn is a great man!
Imagine that
There are folks who believe in AGW and also
Believe that the HS is crap.
Think about that.
What I think about is the essence of your statement….”There are folks who believe…”
WOW!!!
Imagine that
There are folks who believe in Unicorns and also
Believe that the HS is crap.
Think about that.
Think about what you just said! (What do think HS means?)
MikeB
June 12, 2015 at 11:04 am
Think about what you just said! (What do think HS means?)
=====================================================================
I know what HS is.
I am suggesting that there are exceptionally dim people out there that know that the HS is a giant turd of false research.
So it shouldn’t be a surprise to find out SOME CAGW cultists can see the HS is crap.
May just be difficulty of language at times, but not sure that is fair.
If you are a rational person you do believe in stuff. It’s just that you need evidence before you believe or accept something to be worth believing. In religion all that is required is personal revelation or faith in the ultimate authority of church or scripture. Neither of which can act as empirical evidence.
In my opinion and probably yours there is not nearly sufficient evidence to believe in AGW. For Mosher, there is apparently enough evidence without the HS to “believe”.
Mosher –
I assume you are one of those “folks” (pls correct me if I’m wrong).
Could you please define “AGW” for us?
– How much & how fast?
– Does it exceed natural variability now or in the future?
– Irreversible?
– An existential threat?
– Unprecedented?
– Net positive or net negative (to the “ecosystem”, to “mankind”)?
Merci,
Kurt in Switzerland
Mosher:
Perhaps they should file an amicus brief on behalf of Steyn then. Have you thought about that?
Steven,
You are correct that AGW is a faith-based belief rather than a scientific observation. There is no evidence that it has actually happened in the climate system.
There are however valid observations supporting the fact of local human effects on weather and climate. Las Vegas is a lot hotter outside (and colder on the inside) now than 100 years ago, for instance, thanks to human activity there. But of man-made global warming from radiative physics and GHE from man-made GHGs, not so much. Zero detectable, in fact.
But if AGW ever were to exist, it would be a good thing, as has been the addition of an extra molecule of CO2 per 10,000 dry air molecules, ie up from about three to four, since c. AD 1850.
I remember a study from several years back regarding California’s central valley. Seems there had been noticeable cooling during the day and warming during the night, that many attributed to irrigation.
Mark,
It could be that John Christy was involved in that study. IIRC, he’s from the Central Valley.
Another knee slapper, I think- hard to tell what Mosher is ever saying.
I’ll just take HS to mean a useful horse byproduct loved by gardens.
Go Steyn, go!
You might consider making a small donation to Steyn’s legal fund (I did).
see: http://www.steynonline.com/6048/give-the-gift-of-steyn
I’ll also buy the book.
Correction: I just bought the book!