Rantburg

Today's Front Page   View All of Fri 04/26/2024 View Thu 04/25/2024 View Wed 04/24/2024 View Tue 04/23/2024 View Mon 04/22/2024 View Sun 04/21/2024 View Sat 04/20/2024
2017-07-06 Science & Technology
Michael Mann screws the pooch in Canadian court
[Proncipia-Scientific] Penn State climate scientist, Michael ‘hockey stick’ Mann commits contempt of court in the ‘climate science trial of the century.’ Prominent alarmist shockingly defies judge and refuses to surrender data for open court examination. Only possible outcome: Mann’s humiliation, defeat and likely criminal investigation in the U.S.

The defendant in the libel trial, the 79-year-old Canadian climatologist, Dr Tim Ball (above, right) is expected to instruct his British Columbia attorneys to trigger mandatory punitive court sanctions, including a ruling that Mann did act with criminal intent when using public funds to commit climate data fraud. Mann’s imminent defeat is set to send shock waves worldwide within the climate science community as the outcome will be both a legal and scientific vindication of U.S. President Donald Trump’s claims that climate scare stories are a “hoax.”

As can be seen from the graphs below; Mann’s cherry-picked version of science makes the Medieval Warm Period (MWP) disappear and shows a pronounced upward ‘tick’ in the late 20th century (the blade of his ‘hockey stick’). But below that, Ball’s graph, using more reliable and widely available public data, shows a much warmer MWP, with temperatures hotter than today, and showing current temperatures well within natural variation.

Michael Mann, who chose to file what many consider to be a cynical SLAPP (Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation) libel suit in the British Columbia Supreme Court, Vancouver six long years ago, has astonished legal experts by refusing to comply with the court direction to hand over all his disputed graph’s data. Mann’s iconic hockey stick has been relied upon by the UN’s IPCC and western governments as crucial evidence for the science of ‘man-made global warming.’

As first reported in Principia Scientific International (February 1, 2017), the defendant in the case, Canadian climatologist Dr. Tim Ball, had won “concessions” against Mann, but at the time the details were kept confidential, pending Mann’s response.

The negative and unresponsive actions of Dr Mann and his lawyer, Roger McConchie, are expected to infuriate the judge and be the signal for the collapse of Mann’s multi-million dollar libel suit against Dr Ball. It will be music to the ears of so-called ‘climate deniers’ like President Donald Trump and his EPA Chief, Scott Pruitt.

As Dr Ball explains:

“Michael Mann moved for an adjournment of the trial scheduled for February 20, 2017. We had little choice because Canadian courts always grant adjournments before a trial in their belief that an out of court settlement is preferable. We agreed to an adjournment with conditions. The major one was that he [Mann] produce all documents including computer codes by February 20th, 2017. He failed to meet the deadline.”
Posted by badanov 2017-07-06 00:00|| || Front Page|| [13 views ]  Top

#1 1) I bet Mark Steyn is one happy camper all of a sudden.
2) This Feb. 20th 'deadline' was missed over four months ago, and we're just hearing about it now?
Posted by Raj 2017-07-06 01:39||   2017-07-06 01:39|| Front Page Top

#2 Prominent alarmist shockingly defies judge and refuses to surrender data for open court examination.

Back in 10th grade Chemistry, our teacher Mr G taught us that when we wrote a paper, we needed to present not just our conclusions but *all* our data and calculations. Not exactly revolutionary stuff, it was just the way science was done. Anyone who said, as Mr. Mann has, "I can't show you the data, you'll just try to find something wrong with it" would have been laughed out of class.

It warms my heart to see this fraudulent climate nonsense unraveling. One day, "global warming" will be recognized as the biggest scam since the Piltdown Man.
Posted by SteveS 2017-07-06 02:07||   2017-07-06 02:07|| Front Page Top

#3 Either 1. he not longer has the data (a common problem in climate science).

2. He never had the data in the first place.

3. The data he had was fake and would be revealed as such.

Mann is a nasty character and charlatan, and I hope he gets slammed by the courts.
Posted by phil_b 2017-07-06 02:41||   2017-07-06 02:41|| Front Page Top

#4 I call it climate Lysenkoism for a reason.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lysenkoism

The term Lysenkoism can also be used metaphorically to describe the manipulation or distortion of the scientific process as a way to reach a predetermined conclusion as dictated by an ideological bias, often related to social or political objectives.
Posted by Bright Pebbles 2017-07-06 05:51||   2017-07-06 05:51|| Front Page Top

#5 phil_b, embrace the liberating power of "AND".

None of your choices is exclusive and 2 & 3 are kissing cousins.
Posted by AlanC 2017-07-06 07:29||   2017-07-06 07:29|| Front Page Top

#6 although the PS post is recent, there is no actual event that I can see

Mann may have committed contempt and he may be contemptible but no court has yet found him 'in contempt'.

So this is actually a prediction not a report.
Posted by lord garth 2017-07-06 07:43||   2017-07-06 07:43|| Front Page Top

#7 The Medieval Warm Period has always been an inconvenient truth
Posted by European Conservative 2017-07-06 08:14||   2017-07-06 08:14|| Front Page Top

#8 Same Canadian court system that just gave Omar Khadr over $10 million? Watch them lock Dr. Ball up and award Mann some sort of medal along with enormous damages...
Posted by M. Murcek 2017-07-06 08:34||   2017-07-06 08:34|| Front Page Top

#9 you'll just try to find something wrong with it

I'm no scientist but that sounds like peer review to me.
Posted by Abu Uluque 2017-07-06 12:51||   2017-07-06 12:51|| Front Page Top

#10 Isn't that the whole point of 'peer review'?

I often participate in 'code reviews' where we 'peer review' each others code. Even though it can be painful and embarrassing it is exceedingly beneficial to all.

I've also seen code reviews used as a bludgeon to force people to one way of thinking. Even had one manager tell me "Nobody uses Object Oriented Programming" and I was forced to rewrite it using non-OO techniques. I think that is the kind of thing going on in some of these pro-climate-change 'peer-reviewsbullying'....
Posted by CrazyFool 2017-07-06 14:21||   2017-07-06 14:21|| Front Page Top

#11 In climate science, peer review is invariably pal review.

Which is why a red team/blue team approach is urgently needed.
Posted by phil_b 2017-07-06 19:48||   2017-07-06 19:48|| Front Page Top

#12 There is no data just made up charts and graphs.
Posted by Airandee 2017-07-06 21:08||   2017-07-06 21:08|| Front Page Top

12:13 MikeKozlowski
12:12 Frank G
12:10 MikeKozlowski
12:09 Skidmark
12:04 Skidmark
12:03 Abu Uluque
12:00 M. Murcek
11:56 Abu Uluque
11:51 M. Murcek
11:50 Skidmark
11:46 Skidmark
11:45 M. Murcek
11:43 M. Murcek
11:41 M. Murcek
11:31 Skidmark
11:31 M. Murcek
11:29 Glenmore
11:27 Skidmark
11:25 M. Murcek
11:25 Skidmark
11:24 Skidmark
11:22 M. Murcek
11:20 Tom
11:19 Grom the Reflective









Paypal:
Google
Search WWW Search rantburg.com