In the third week of the defamation trial in which climate “hockey stick” inventor Michael Mann is suing Mark Steyn and Rand Simberg, Mann rested his case. And now the defense has begun to make its devastating case against the nasty serial litigator in the Climate Trial of the Century. The hockey stick itself is being broken into pieces in public.
On episode 96 of Climate Change Roundtable, special guest Ann McElhinney joins The Heartland Institute’s Anthony Watts, H. Sterling Burnett, Linnea Lueken, and Jim Lakely to break down the latest bombshell moments of the trial. We are sure to mention the devastating testimony on Thursday of renowned statistician Abraham Wyner who exposed Mann’s hockey stick to be the fraud Steyn and Simberg (and many others) say it is.
Join us LIVE at 1 p.m. ET (12 p.m. CT) to get caught up on the trial and join the chat to ask questions of your own.
“You know who’s tried that… Germany”
It’s iconic.
Wyner’s podcast not available on search on iHeart on my iPhone.
I don’t think it’s a podcast. It looks to be a segment called ‘Wharton Moneyball’ on the SiriusXM radio programme.
Re: both “done by Wednesday” and “not thrown out”
The judge might be on a mission to make the case go away – run a trial, get a result, clear the books this week.
Well it has been on the books for 12 years and, by what Mann’s presented in court, on the flimsiest of opinion. I can’t even call it ‘evidence’ as it isn’t – it’s been mostly just Mann’s personal opinion that something happened and he wanted to lash out at someone else.
Something that Linnea said is completely correct in regards to Mann, Schmidt and other climate enthusiasts. In any other industry or business area, those messages or tweets would be considered completely unprofessional to the point of bringing their employer into disrepute; they would, in all likelihood, be the subject of disciplinary procedures. I don’t know of any business that would tolerate that level of unprofessionalism from an employee, free speech notwithstanding.
No matter how this plays out- no mention of it will be found in the mainstream media.
Just one more additional reason to get rid of TV until it becomes real investigative and informative source.
Having listened to thee podcasts, I’ve got to believe that the alarmists are working on spinning the reason for loss of the case. Will be interesting to see.
If it gets thrown out due to case not proven then it’s a win for alarmism as the hockey stick will lurch on, damaged but not destroyed. If it goes the distance and Mann loses then the hockey stick will be completely discredited as fraud.
You’ve got to think, at this point, that some of the apparent ‘mistakes’ are intentional to throw the game – either that or Mann’s lawyers are pretty incompetent.
No, Ann, this is not “the best time in history” as you claim. What cozy little world are you living in? Of course it COULD be if it weren’t for those monstrous tyrants governing our lives.
The podcasts are brilliant. Thank you Ann.
I concur with Linnea. “they don,t care”.
Coyne CX Wyner: “You have no formal qualifications in climate science, do you?”
Neither does Mann.
Neither does Mann.
Bachelor’s degree in Physics and Applied Math
Master’s degree in Physics
Ph.D. in Geology & Geophysics
It doesn’t matter. Climate scientists are self-elected.
Do any universities actually offer degrees in “climate science”?
Unfortunately yes. Many offer courses in ‘Climate Change Science’ or postgraduate ‘top-up’ courses in it. It’s a racket but slightly less than the uni’s offering degrees in astrology (by whatever currently fashionable name).
I’m surprised they don’t call it “Climate Emergency Science”.
I didn’t check for that earlier, wish I had. Swansea University do a BSc (Hons) degree in “Environmental Science and the Climate Emergency.” Whilst the University of the Highlands and Islands (Scotland) do a qualification in “Climate Emergency Fundamentals.”
Oh, this ones good from the Kingston University London – BSc “Environmental Science with Hazards and Disasters.”
There are a number of Climate Emergency Training/Communication qualifications available in various uni’s as well.
Ann,
I’m wondering if you and Phelim are still of the Gandhi-like view that they’re Not Evil, Just Wrong?
I vote “evil” because of mention of “the cause” in the CRU email release.
Gandhi was quite willing to call out evil for what it is, for example:
Gandhi quotes on evil
Because he avoided presenting evidence under his control by failing to pursue his suit against Tim Ball, Mann is, by adverse inference, a self confessed fraud. He’s evil.
commieBob, point well-taken, thanks!
For evil, remember the mentally-disturbed man who attended Michael Mann’s eDx course, posted a fire emoji under its Facebook ad, then immolated himself on the steps of the Supreme Court, not far from the venue of the current trial?
The week he lost his life, Mann tweeted countless times about his own suffering (which revolved around being exposed to Fox News in his hotel gym). He didn’t mention the death of his former student once.
I wonder if Mann even remembers Wynn Bruce’s name every morning as his driver turns into Judiciary Square?
The verdict is in, I don’t have accurate info, but Simberg and Steyn were found to have defamed Mann a couple questions:
Well, the verdict was in. It’s unclear exactly what questions were involved, but the jury agreed with two for each defendant:
Simberg: questions C & D (of 4), punitive damages $1 & $1,000
Steyn: questions A & C (of 3), punitive damages $1 & $1,000,000
Obviously there is more to say, I don’t know what it is yet.
From https://www.nytimes.com/2024/02/08/climate/michael-mann-defation-lawsuit.html :