‘Scientist’ Michael Mann Commits Contempt of Court in ‘Climate Science Trial of the Century’

Back in 2009, “Climategate” was a massive scandal with leaked documents revealing the climate change scam to be what it is, the Gateway Pundit reported on this scandal back when the story first broke.

Christopher Booker of the Telegraph back in 2009 slammed the climate alarmists behind the claims of global warming that was proving to be non-existent. Dr. Michael Mann, the scientist that co-authored a famous graph of temperature trends known as the “hockey stick graph” was implicated in the 2009 global warming email scandal, which the Gateway Pundit previously reported on.

This same Dr. Michael Mann, in 2012, sued the National Review and Competitive Enterprise Institute over their critique of his work regarding the climate change hoax. Mann even posted to his Facebook page about the lawsuit, writing:

Lawsuit filed against The National Review and the Competitive Enterprise Institute 10/22/12

Today, the case of Dr. Michael E. Mann vs. The National Review and The Competitive Enterprise Institute was filed in the Superior Court of the District of Columbia. Dr. Mann, a Professor and Director of the Earth System Science Center at Pennsylvania State University, has instituted this lawsuit against the two organizations, along with two of their authors, based upon their false and defamatory statements accusing him of academic fraud and comparing him to a convicted child molester, Jerry Sandusky. Dr. Mann is being represented by John B. Williams of the law firm of Cozen O’Connor in Washington, D.C.”

He featured a link to his attorney’s website just below the above opening statement.

Now, Dr. Michael “Hockey Stick” Mann committed contempt of court in what is being dubbed the “climate science trial of the century”. Dr. Mann defied the judge presiding over the case and refused to surrender his data for “open court examination”.

Principia Scientific noted the following:

“Only possible outcome: Mann’s humiliation, defeat and likely criminal investigation in the U.S.”

79-year-old Canadian climatologist Dr. Tim Ball is the defendant in the libel trial and is expected to tell his 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”.

The defeat of Dr. Mann will only vindicate President Donald Trump in his claims that climate change is a hoax. The graph below from Principia Scientific shows “Mann’s cherry-picked version of science [that] makes the Medieval Warm Period (MWP) disappear and shows a pronounced upward ’tick’ in the late 20th century” – this is the blade of Mann’s now infamous “hockey stick”.

Below Mann’s graph is Ball’s, which uses much more reliable and easily attainable public data, which accurately shows a significantly warmer MWP with temperatures that are drastically hotter than the modern day’s.

Principia Scientific reports:

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.”

Comments

As a privately owned web site, we reserve the right to edit or remove comments that contain spam, advertising, vulgarity, threats of violence, racism, anti-Semitism, or personal/abusive attacks on other users. The same applies to trolling, the use of multiple aliases, or just generally being a jerk. Enforcement of this policy is at the sole discretion of the site administrators and repeat offenders may be blocked or permanently banned without warning