Court Delivers Massive Blow to Famed Climate Scientist Who Sued Critics

From THE DAILY CALLER

Nick Pope
Contributor

A Washington, D.C., court rejected University of Pennsylvania climate scientist Michael Mann’s bid to postpone his required payment of hundreds of thousands of dollars to National Review on Thursday.

The Superior Court of the District of Columbia ruled in January that Mann owes National Review approximately $530,000 to cover the outlet’s legal fees after spending more than a decade locked in defamation litigation against the organization, and Mann subsequently requested a stay to postpone the payments. On Thursday, the court denied Mann’s request, meaning that he will likely have to pony up cash to an outlet he once described in emails as a “threat to our children.” (RELATED: DC Jury Found ‘Hockey Stick’ Critics Defamed Scientist. What Does That Mean For Scientific Discourse Going Forward?)

Mann Filing by Nick Pope on Scribd

Mann initially sued National Review in 2012, when Canadian conservative Mark Steyn knocked Mann and his famed “hockey stick” climate model in a post on National Review’s website. National Review editor Rich Lowry then authored a follow-up post backing Steyn’s, and Mann decided to sue the outlet for defamation along with Steyn and Rand Simberg, a former adjunct for the Competitive Enterprise Institute. While Mann’s lawsuit against Steyn and Simberg prevailed initially, the superior court judge determined in January that Mann would have to pay the $531,000 within 30 days, National Review’s editors announced at the time.

In a filing opposing National Review’s request for compensation, Mann argued that the move was a “mean-spirited and unjustified request by a powerful organization” intending to intimidate and silence him.

Notably, Judge Albert Irving wrote in March that Mann and his lawyers had presented misleading information to the jury while the defamation case was at trial. Specifically, Mann and his representation misled the jury as to how much grant funding he missed out on due to the actions of the defendants, a key element of his defamation case, with Irving describing the deception as “extraordinary in its scope, extent, and intent.”

All content created by the Daily Caller News Foundation, an independent and nonpartisan newswire service, is available without charge to any legitimate news publisher that can provide a large audience. All republished articles must include our logo, our reporter’s byline and their DCNF affiliation. For any questions about our guidelines or partnering with us, please contact licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.

4.9 39 votes
Article Rating

Discover more from Watts Up With That?

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

43 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Tom Halla
April 5, 2025 6:12 pm

So the court found His Holiness, Michael Mann, Head Scribe of the Church of Climate Change, is strangers with truth? Sheer blasphemy!!

joe-Dallas
Reply to  Tom Halla
April 6, 2025 5:11 am

Mann demonstrated that he is a serial liar through the 13 years of litigation. Why would any trust his “professional work” when he his personal ethics are so pathetic.

joe-Dallas
Reply to  Tom Halla
April 6, 2025 5:16 am
joe-Dallas
Reply to  Tom Halla
April 6, 2025 5:54 am

With Mann filing a multitude of appeals with the circuit court of appeals, this case wont be over for 2-3 more years.

Also worth noting that is Mann’s motion opposing the award of fees to national review, Mann and his attorney’s grossly distorted the facts and pleadings in Banks v. Hoffman, No. 20-CV-0318. Judge Irving’s response denying Mann’s motion stated that Mann grossly distorted the holding of the case. Hopefully, Judge Irvings Order will alert the Appeals Court to Mann’s extreme propensity to Lie !

starzmom
April 5, 2025 6:13 pm

Sometimes there is just karma.

Dave Burton
April 5, 2025 6:19 pm

Mann’s claims were frivolous, and the accusations made against him, that provoked his lawsuits, were true. He’s thoroughly dishonest, and anyone who doesn’t have a problem with his dishonesty thereby proves their own low ethical standards. Does anyone still remember Climategate?

comment image

Reply to  Dave Burton
April 5, 2025 6:51 pm

Briffa’s tree ring data post-1900.

Briffa-Tree-data-1900
Reply to  bnice2000
April 6, 2025 4:01 am

Yeah, Briffa’s tree ring data has the same temperature profile as the U.S. regional chart, and all the other historic, original, regional temperature charts from around the world.

This is the true temperature profile of the Earth, and it shows that it is no warmer today than it was in the recent past, which shows that CO2 is a minor player in the Earth’s atmosphere and adds minimal warmth to the atsmosphere.

comment image

Reply to  Tom Abbott
April 6, 2025 1:36 pm

Yep even places like South Africa have the same profile.

1940s-South-African-temps
Reply to  Tom Abbott
April 6, 2025 1:37 pm

And the Andes in South America.

Basically a world wide pattern

Andes-South-America-De-Jong-16
Reply to  bnice2000
April 7, 2025 2:59 am

Yes, a worldwide pattern.

Forrest Gardener
Reply to  Dave Burton
April 5, 2025 10:25 pm

It might be just me, but if the actual known data goes in the opposite direction to the proxy, then the proxy is shown to have no scientific value whatsoever.

The Mann should consider himself hoist on his own petard. But for some reason the scientific community has just ignored the total invalidation of tree rings as a proxy.

April 5, 2025 6:29 pm

Manns a tree rings scientist , why doesnt he just shake the money tree

this is his ‘research’ group
https://web.sas.upenn.edu/mannresearchgroup/
it seems like they have expanded way behind tree rings into areas he has no expertise

2024 Atlantic Hurricane prediction ..WRONG

Reply to  Duker
April 5, 2025 8:46 pm

Mann has expertise in tree rings? Who knew?

Reply to  Graemethecat
April 6, 2025 4:04 am

How do you get to be a tree ring expert if you only examine one tree?

April 5, 2025 7:11 pm

This just might make any climate scientist think twice about their research and anything they might publish that cannot stand scrutiny. Had Mann simply offered up his research for scrutiny he would not be in this mess, because his data would have been refuted, dismissed and rejected as fraudulent. The peer review process should gave uncovered this “fake science.” His ego, arrogance and pride got the best of him. Trustworthiness, integrity and humility mean something in science. Its how you gain respect and dignity amongst your peers.

Ed Zuiderwijk
Reply to  George T
April 6, 2025 1:47 am

It didn’t get the best of him. He only IS ego, arrogance and pride.

Reply to  George T
April 6, 2025 4:07 am

“Trustworthiness, integrity and humility mean something in science. Its how you gain respect and dignity amongst your peers.”

Mann has none of that.

Read “A Disgrace to the Profession” and you will find that Mann doesn’t have any respect from his peers, either. Other than his co-conspirators, who are just as shameful as he is.

Abbas Syed
April 5, 2025 7:47 pm

Mann decided to become a poster boy for the climate change movement very early in his career

It was a calculated move, not out of conviction. This was the quickest way to rise through the ranks to full professor – also he has a massive ego (though little talent) and loves the limelight and adulation

The green blob loved him because he was a “scientist”, well connected in the IPCC circuit with all the other frauds

He was a go-to rent a gob, mainly because he is very aggressive, and totally lacking in any shame when it comes to lying

Just look at the hockey stick. Anyone with a basic knowledge of PCA knows it’s a spurious result, and that doesn’t take into account the selective use and splicing of the data

Yet he would viciously attack anyone who even suggested his results may have been flawed. In these attacks he would not even bother to try to demonstrate a basic a knowledge of the techniques he was using, he just screamed very loud, all sorts of ad hominen and other nonsense

Unfortunately for Mann, I think all of his wealthy and powerful backers are backing away (pardon the pun) because he’s too extreme and has become too toxic even for them in this new era of greater scrutiny and skepticism. They realise they have to dial it down and lay low for a while – Mann is not capable of this

He may well end up bankrupt

missoulamike
Reply to  Abbas Syed
April 5, 2025 8:13 pm

To any legal beagles out there why is he not charged with perjury? Different standards in a civil case? Sure seems like lying was a big factor in the jury buying his BS.

Scarecrow Repair
Reply to  missoulamike
April 5, 2025 10:08 pm

I was told once on a legal forum that perjury is a criminal offense which only government prosecutors can charge. There have been cases where police have lied on the stand, under oath, and led to false convictions and the state paying millions in compensation, and the cop doesn’t even get slapped on the wrist. They won’t waste time charging Mann with perjury.

Reply to  Scarecrow Repair
April 6, 2025 12:34 am

They won’t waste time charging Mann with perjury.

Especially given he later submitted revised figures reducing the damages from nearly $10M to about $100k in one instance. Everyone knows his intention was to deceive and he was caught out and had to change his tune but its essentially impossible to prove.

Abbas Syed
Reply to  missoulamike
April 5, 2025 10:36 pm

Because in the end, it’s the prosecutors who decide the cases to bring before the courts

They are motivated by politics, optics, and probably other factors

With the entire political system in favour of green lunacy, there was never much chance of a prosecutor going after this little dirtbag

Though, times have changed….

Editor
Reply to  Abbas Syed
April 6, 2025 3:45 am

I hope he doesn’t end up bankrupt, because that means people he owes money to won’t get paid. OTOH “bankrupt” does have a nice ring to it.

Reply to  Abbas Syed
April 6, 2025 4:16 am

“Just look at the hockey stick. Anyone with a basic knowledge of PCA knows it’s a spurious result, and that doesn’t take into account the selective use and splicing of the data”

Keep that in mind the next time you see our resident Climate Alarmists posting a Hockey Stick chart, as if it is evidence of anything. The Hockey Stick chart is evidence of fraud, and that is all.

The Hockey Stick Chart is the BIG LIE of Alarmist Climate Science. It’s the only “evidence” Climate Alarmists can point to connecting CO2 to temperature increases, and it is completely made up out of whole cloth, and does not represent reality.

How many TRILLIONS of dollars has this bogus, bastardized Hockey Stick Chart cost our civilization?

How much mental damage has this bogus Hockey Stick Chart and its implications caused the populations of the world?

The Court should make Mann repay these costs to the world, or put him in jail for life, whichever is more practical.

April 5, 2025 8:51 pm

No doubt Stokes, Simon, and the other resident trolls will attempt to défend the indefensible…

Forrest Gardener
Reply to  Graemethecat
April 5, 2025 10:30 pm

Yes, but it is taking longer and longer each time. There is a disturbance in the farce.

Phillip Bratby
Reply to  Graemethecat
April 5, 2025 10:57 pm

I was just going to say that I expect Nick Stokes to come to the rescue.

Reply to  Graemethecat
April 5, 2025 11:19 pm

Funny that you mention them, haven’t seen any of their comments on this particular thread yet. Hmm…I wonder why?

cgh
Reply to  varg
April 6, 2025 5:42 pm

Maybe the ‘bot needed reprogramming? After all, Stokes is an obvious fake identification.

Reply to  Graemethecat
April 6, 2025 12:30 am

Nick usually defends the models. I think he sees attacks on GCMs as being attacks on CFD and he’s a specialist in that.

observa
April 5, 2025 11:08 pm

with Irving describing the deception as “extraordinary in its scope, extent, and intent.”

Climate change 101

Reply to  observa
April 6, 2025 4:24 am

Everything about Alarmist Climate Science is deception.

Coeur de Lion
April 5, 2025 11:52 pm

I have written to the Royal Society asking them why they made Mann a member, quoting inter alia the 100 world class scientist who have labelled him A Disgrace to the Profession in Mark Steyn’s book

Reply to  Coeur de Lion
April 6, 2025 1:19 am

I hope you’re not expecting a reply.

Reply to  Coeur de Lion
April 6, 2025 4:25 am

Do they have an email address? Maybe we could all write them. 🙂

cgh
Reply to  Coeur de Lion
April 6, 2025 5:50 pm

The Royal Society has been a disgrace ever since it had Lord Kelvin as its President 150 years ago. It endorsed his ridiculous claims about the age of the earth.

April 6, 2025 5:12 am

Suppose there’s any truth to Mann’s proposition that atmospheric carbon dioxide is the climate control knob, and that “we” are facing doomsday if “we” don’t reduce it? (There is no proof, but let’s just suppose,)

Over the past 30+ years of climate panic, China has continued to expand their use of coal, heavy manufacturing of steel and concrete, and exporting heavy machinery like windmills and solar panels to the rest of the world.

That industrial activity is making China rich and powerful, yet it’s goading the West into ever-greater guilt trips and fits of self flagellation. China now emits more CO2 than the rest of the world combined. The EU quarreling with North America over whose CO2 reductions are more pivotal to the survival of “the planet” is like the two fleas from Crocodile Dundee arguing over which flea owns the dog they live on.

Making an uncredentialed, neurotic Swedish teenager into a poster child for “science,” is more Freak Show theatrics, and an insult to any normal adult’s intelligence.

The trial bar bloodsucking off Mann vs. Steyn is only another aspect of ceaseless, self-destructive, ultimately inconsequential quarreling.

When will people get smart? That’s what I’d like to know.

2hotel9
April 6, 2025 6:21 am

What is UPenn crying about? The can simply pay this out of all the money China gives them.

antigtiff
April 6, 2025 8:06 am

Another mannificent decision…..seems like mannifest destiny?

April 6, 2025 9:17 am

Coming next, Michael Mann to file for bankruptcy (falsely claiming . . .)

Once a poseur, always a poseur.

Reply to  ToldYouSo
April 6, 2025 1:43 pm

Mann has always been morally and scientifically bankrupt !

tmitsss
April 7, 2025 4:52 am

Did Mann ever pay the legal costs assessed against him in the Canadian lawsuit he lost against Tim Ball?