https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hockey_stick_controversy
Posted on 11/21/2019 4:00:35 AM PST by yesthatjallen
The Supreme Court on Friday will consider whether to take up a prominent climatologist's defamation suit against a venerated conservative magazine, in a case that pits climate scientists against the free speech rights of global warming skeptics.
The dispute between scientist Michael Mann and the National Review has drawn attention from lawmakers, interest groups, academics and media, as the court weighs adding a potentially blockbuster First Amendment showdown to an already politically charged docket.
Scientists hail Mann’s lawsuit as a necessary defense against efforts to erode public confidence in the scientific consensus that climate change is an urgent threat, while free speech advocates have rallied around the iconic conservative publication.
The case has made for strange bedfellows, with the National Review receiving backing from the Center for Investigative Reporting, which has produced award-winning coverage of climate change; Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.); The Washington Post; and the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU).
SNIP
(Excerpt) Read more at thehill.com ...
“Scientists” should be in quotes.
Science is a process.
1. hypothesis
2. evidence
3. theory
4. publish in peer reviewed journal
5. take a beating from your peers and eventually have someone find your theory is flawed.
“Scientists” are leftist ideologues in lab coats.
I don’t wear a lab coat and I am conservative. Please don’t broad brush all scientists.
Michael Mann should shove that hockey stick up his ozone hole.
He’s given a team of lawyers for free because he is a standard bearer for a large plank of a deceptive ideology.
He indeed did cook the books, there is no question. I’ve seen the data and methods and know that Mann and others were perpetrating a scientific fraud, And I am trained to see it.
But I am hesitant to dismiss an outcome against Mann as given because SCOTUS took it up which is disturbing given they turn away tens of thousands of cases each year that are more of substance.
There are also recent cases in favor of Planned Parenthood and against such high profile persons as Roger Stone. So it seems the Left is on a roll but ...
... but this is SCOTUS and not some penny ante corrupt lower court shopped out by lefty lawyers.
I haven’t reviewed the case and don’t have time but I would guess that Mann’s attorneys inserted some landmines in their previous case that would guarantee they had a shot at SCOTUS. If anything the Left has lawyers that know how to game the system but usually those with the means can get lower cases overturned on appeal.
The problem is the Left has practically limitless funds for their pet causes to sustain a network of Ivy League lawyers who are part of the judicial elite, and the judges know it and fall in line when called.
Fortunately, POTUS has been working tirelessly to reform the judiciary and is making headway.
There are so many reasons the Left need to have him impeached.
If and when he gets a 2nd term, SCOTUS will swing conservative and more circuit courts will as well. That should leave a couple of generations with a judiciary that rules on law not relying on clever twisting interpretative argumentation.
But mafia-type elements will always be angling to capture judges into their web. That’s the real danger. Judges need security at home and in public. And they need to be paid well so there is no temptation of taking bribes, Judicial IG offices need to be beefed up and empowered.
Part of the problem of judges is that good potential ones are put off by the corruption they see and the pay squalor compared to a successful private practice. The difference is between low six figures and seven figures.
There is very little that is more stabilizing and calming than a wise judge who sees clearly the issues and players before them. When the truth is on your side, it all falls to the wisdom of courts to see it and if that is missing, life and freedom become jaded.
“There is no such thing as consensus in real science. “ -— That does not seem true. The Earth revolves around the Sun surely is consensus.
Could governments that pursue Michael Mann for fraudulent data reports reclaim money that might have funded his “research”?
Is that what is on the line here? If he committed fraud and if it is exposed, is he liable?
Maybe all data related to the “science” of climate change should be required to show a graph beginning in the year 1900, for example. Maybe the year when they data began to be colllected.
What fraudsters these climate change people are.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hockey_stick_controversy
There is no longer consensus that only women have babies and periods.
Great reply, thank you. I wonder how Mann’s previous legal fraud baggage and precedent is going to affect this. Have they waited long enough now that SCOTUS will have forgotten this I wonder?
How did Mickey Mouse vote on the issue?
re: “Supreme Court weighs lawsuit pitting climate scientist against skeptics”
Most of these so-called climate scientist are just STATISTICIANS who haven’t the slightest idea how atmospheric thermodynamics work, making them little more than climate phrenologists* ...
.
.
.
*Phrenology - pseudoscience which involves the measurement of bumps on the skull to predict mental traits
Unfortunately, Western Civilization is in an advance state of decadence. Moral rot and decay are at the dark heart of the decadence, and among the worst of these are contempt for truth and contempt for the freedom to seek truth.
The Left ("progressivism," "liberalism" --whatever the nom du jour) is the sickness resulting from the decadence, from the moral rot and decay.
Contempt for freedom of speech, for the free exchange of ideas, and for truth itself and freedom itself are basic to the moral rot and decay and to the Left.
This is why the Left is totalitarian. Its basis is contempt for liberty and truth.
In fact, the Left has only contempt for Western Civilization.
And note that the basis of the Left is contempt--hatred. It is not a movement based on love, charity, truth, or justice; on the contrary, its basis is hate, anger, greed, envy, self-indulgence, and moral rot and decay.
The Left is the symptom of the decadence of Western Civilization.
“National Review gets grief, some of it justified, from around here. But in this they are on the side of the angels.”
I disagree. My recollection was NR and Stein had a disagreement over how to defend themselves. Stein wanted to go after the underlying data and prove the falsehood. NR wanted the easier win based on free speech, If NR wins here it doesn’t disprove Mann’s analysis. Stein was right. NR wrong. In Canada, Mann was ordered to turn over the data and didn’t and lost. That ruling will get buried in the press if NR wins here. I hope the Supreme Court rules against NR and has to go after the facts of the case. Get the data and prove Mann is wrong. If NR wins now it will not be vindication. It will be a Pyrrhic victory.
Exactly. I always point this out to Gaia Worshippers. Consensus ie opinions are not how science works. Data, experiments, predictions, hypotheses which are both falsifiable and repeatable are how the Scientific Method works. There is no room for mere opinions.
That the earth rotate3s about the sun is NOT ‘consensus’. It is demonstrated by observation, measurements, analysis, and confirmation.
To be a bit more precise: Consensus is no substitute for proof, using the scientific method.
“ This douche just had a libel case dismissed in Canada...”
Beat me to it.
Science Fraud bump for later....
Thank you for that link, MAGAthon...
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.