Posted on 02/12/2014 10:15:11 PM PST by Valpal1
So let’s just cut through that crap and remind ourselves briefly what we know about the plaintiff. Michael Mann was an obscure young physicist-turned-climatologist who rose without trace in 1998 with the publication in Nature of his ‘hockey stick’ chart showing dramatic and apparently unprecedented late-20th-century global warming.
There followed almost instant fame, on which Mann has traded ever since — gaining tenure at Penn State University, drawing millions in public funding for research, often called on by the Guardian and the New York Times to sum up the state of climate science. Al Gore used a version of Mann’s hockey stick in his Oscar-winning An Inconvenient Truth. The IPCC used it five times in its Third Assessment Report and promoted Mann to lead author.
(Excerpt) Read more at spectator.co.uk ...
I believe the problem is that you don't know how to read.
The Nobel “prize” means absolutely nothing anymore...
But...
If someone were to develop an adult diaper to successfully contain all the poopy democrats extrude, than that actually might be noteworthy...
But, I’m sure as hell not going to change that diaper!!!
It would be better if support did not come from the coal or oil industries because the media, if Mark were to succeed, will just report that the coal/oil industries bought and paid for the verdict.
Committing a crime is no longer the crime? Exposing the criminal actions of others is now the crime?
-PJ
That's about right.
Returning to Heartland, one of their biggest donors is anonymous. So that donor can not be identified but the donor can be characterized, or characterized.
No, what I'm saying is that if the case goes to trial and Steyn proves the falacy of the man-made global warming religion, it can be used to confront the "settled-science" crowd. However, if Steyn is funded by oil/coal companies, the lefties will use that fact to deminish the actual result of disproving man-made global warming.
He can't do that because his stated defense is that what he said was merely opinion.
Accept the reality, what Steyn said/did back at that time was one part of a co-ordinated attempt to discredit.
There is an old rule: When you start calling people names, that means you are losing the argument, or have lost the argument
That is a libel against Carson. Mann is a liar through and through.
There is no such thing as consensus science. If it's consensus, it isn't science. If it's science, it isn't consensus. Period.
He can try, but he can't. However, he may not have to. The liberal court is already stacked against Steyn and in a jury trial feelings and emotion often outweigh the facts, especially in DC. The story title is aptly named - what was originally considered a slam-dunk defense is now in doubt and Mark's head may be handed to him for showing (let alone saying) the "emperor has no clothes."
I doubt that Scooter has the gift of gab and descriptive language that Mark has!
You would think that the Judge would laugh at a scientist who publicly asserted a theory then started suing his critics.
Thanx for this post
Paul Krugman for example. I think he found his econ degree in a box of Cracker Jacks
“When Steyn’s lawyers ask for all documents and data related to his theory, they will end this.”
Not so sure that’s correct. If you have a compliant judge, he will order documents to be produced under a protective order that prevents Steyn from making them public.
If the “Inconvenient Truth” has some inconvenient scientific, fact based and more accurate picture of this made up issue...
What exactly is the court dragging Steyn in for???
I stand to be corrected if I have not understood this to be the case...
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.