Skip to comments.Judge Scales Back Climate Scientist’s Case Against Bloggers
Posted on 07/28/2021 11:22:06 AM PDT by Right Wing Vegan
A Washington, D.C. judge has ruled that the conservative think tank the Competitive Enterprise Institute cannot be held responsible for an outside blogger’s 2012 online attack on a prominent climate scientist.
At the same time, the judge decided that a jury should decide whether the blogger, Rand Simberg, should be held liable for his post, which excoriated Pennsylvania State University climatologist Michael Mann and suggested that he had engaged in fraud. Mark Steyn, an outside blogger for the National Review, another conservative publication, also should face a trial over his own post, two days after Simberg’s, Superior Court Judge Alfred Irving Jr. ruled.
Steyn had quoted extensively from Simberg’s original broadside, comparing the climate scientist to Jerry Sandusky, the disgraced Penn State assistant football coach in the wake of Sandusky’s conviction for child sexual abuse, writing that Mann “molested and tortured data in the service of politicized science.” After demanding a retraction and an apology that were not forthcoming, Mann sued for defamation and intentional infliction of emotional distress.
(Excerpt) Read more at insideclimatenews.org ...
Well, THAT was quick....
It took years, but Steyn was completely vindicated in Canada. A key point in that trial was Mann refusing to submit his raw data to a court appointed scientific panel for independent review.
Mann has been proven to be a fraud and yet he is still lauded by the Ministry of Propaganda.
(or something like that.)
“...held responsible for an... online attack...”??? What country is this again? I sometimes forget.
Who the hell is paying Mann’s substantial 10 year legal bills?
No slant in this article, is there? SMH...
He was? Do you have a link?
free speech is a crime now? Who can i call to report blm and antifa who have said icky things about white folks?
Criminy- blm can burn down federal buildings with people inside, or towns, or vehicles that aren’t theirs, and the law does practically nothing about it, but now they are considering convicting people for saying ‘mean things’ about a climate scientist? Is this still America? Or Nazi Germany? Perhaps we are the untied states of North Korea? Or China?
[[intentional infliction of emotional distress.]]
Hey Mann- how bout Jews who have to endure the hateful nasty things Palestinians say about them here in the US? How about white folks having to be called ‘White privilege, White Supremacists Extremists, Terrorists’ by you and your ilk constantly? We’re not whining about it- Grow up!~
I don’t know but he is still employed by Penn State, so its likely the Pennsylvania taxpayer.
Hey they paid a mental patient to be their State Health guru so why not Micheal Mann !
Thought crime bad. Orange Man bad.
Didn’t Mann already lose his lawsuit against Steyn in Canada because he wouldn’t produce his research calculations to the court?
The American court actions have been in civil court. Mann brought suit against Steyn for defamation. Actually, he originally sued Steyn and National Review magazine, but a judge removed National Review from the case.
IIRC, wasn’t Mann DIRECTLY involved in the fraud at East Anglia, where the source code they used in their climate model actually had commented code stating why it was in there, to change the output because it didn’t help their cause?
You would think the US judge would have asked Mann’s legal team if they are willing to have their client produce his research. If not then this case will be dismissed.
the great Mark Stein would lol at the characterization of National Review, as “another conservative publication.”
They get to prove the fraud. That is a good thing.
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.