Breaking: Climate Scientist Michael Mann Lawyers Up after Penn State Child Sex Link
Michael Mann of Pennsylvania State University today (July 21, 2012) announced his intention to pursue legal action against The National Review Online (NRO) and popular right-wing writer, Mark Steyn over their article `Football and Hockey.'
In the wake of Louis Freeh's report on Penn State's complicity in serial rape, Rand Simberg writes of Unhappy Valley's other scandal: "I'm referring to another cover up and whitewash that occurred there two years ago, before we learned how rotten and corrupt the culture at the university was. But now that we know how bad it was, perhaps it's time that we revisit the Michael Mann affair, particularly given how much we've also learned about his and others' hockey-stick deceptions since. Mann could be said to be the Jerry Sandusky of climate science, except that instead of molesting children, he has molested and tortured data in the service of politicized science that could have dire economic consequences for the nation and planet."……Michael Mann was the man behind the fraudulent climate-change "hockey-stick" graph, the very ringmaster of the tree-ring circus. And, when the East Anglia emails came out, Penn State felt obliged to "investigate" Professor Mann. Graham Spanier, the Penn State president forced to resign over Sandusky, was the same cove who investigated Mann. And, as with Sandusky and Paterno, the college declined to find one of its star names guilty of any wrongdoing.On his Facebook page an irate Mann proclaims, "I have formally demanded a retraction of, and apology for, this defamatory piece about me by National Review. I have retained counsel to pursue my legal rights." Mann's attorney, John B Williams of Cozen & O'Connor (Washington D.C.) asserts on the first page of his "take down" notice that NRO "know" that there is "no evidence of any academic fraud" by Mann. Page Two of the notice lists those whitewash official investigations that cleared Mann. However, Williams appears unaware that the official investigations did not examine Mann's still hidden "dirty laundry" - his metadata - nor did they address other adverse evidence or interview witnesses against Mann…….
[In his Dr. Ball lawsuit] Mann is doing without the expensive Canadian libel expert, Roger McConchie who Mann has been using to pursue a separate libel claim against popular Canadian climate scientist, Dr. Tim Ball. That case isn't going well for Mann because he appears to be stalling about complying with a court motion to hand over his hidden "dirty laundry" metadata to courtroom scrutiny. The British Columbia Supreme Court, where the case is currently being heard, has the right to order Mann to reveal all such withheld data. If Mann persists in failing to comply the court may find him in contempt and dismiss his case and award substantial damages in favor of Ball.
My Take – I have been following the old lawsuit from the beginning and I wondered why I hadn’t seen anything lately. Now I know….he hasn’t turned over the required documents. When the first lawsuit was started I thought…. can he be serious? We have all the evidence from McIntyre and McKitrick that showed the Hockey Stick Graph to be fraudulent and why. Was it done deliberately? It is hard to explain how it could have been an accident. So I wondered if he understood that when you sue someone everything comes out, including all the e-mails he has been hiding from Virginia Attorney General Cuccinelli with the help of the University of Virginia, claiming this is an attempt to infringe on scientific freedom.
One has to wonder if his scientific understanding and his legal understanding are on par. Now let’s assume that he doesn’t turn over the documents and is found in contempt, the judgment goes to Dr. Bell. What then? He will have a large financial settlement in his lap. Who will pay for it? The other thing I wonder about is the “I have a tiger by the tail” scenario. Once you start an official lawsuit you just can’t say….Ok…I was just kidding…I didn’t mean any of it...let's all just go home and forget about it! No, you are now in a position to be cross sued. Then you will still have to turn all the records over. And if he doesn’t then turn them over and the courts find in favor of Bell, or Steyn as the case may be, the amount of damages may be even higher than he would have to pay in the initial suit.
This is so interesting to watch. I have been on the right side of this from the very beginning and I love seeing all of the facts being forced into the light of day. Which I might add should have been done automatically as part of an honest peer review. Peer review, as flawed as it has become in recent years, is still the primary factor in determining what is science and what isn't. None of their work was peer reviewed by anyone that wasn't part and parcel of the program because they stated that after all their years of work they didn't want anyone to tear their work apart. That isn't peer review.
The job of peer reviewers is to find fault and tear their work apart. They know that, and didn't want to face it.