Forum Home | Log in | Signup | My Page | Rules | FAQ | Boards | Members | Search
« GRITZ Home | Email msg. | Reply to msg. | Post new | Board info. Previous | Home | Next

Re: Hockey Stick - nonupdate 

By: Zimbler0 in GRITZ | Recommend this post (1)
Mon, 05 May 25 3:59 AM | 12 view(s)
Boardmark this board | Grits Breakfast of Champeens! 		Msg. 07825 of 07843
(This msg. is a reply to 07800 by monkeytrots)
Jump:
Jump to board:
Jump to msg. #

MT > What is the current status of the 'hockey stick' lawsuit against Mark Stein ? ... err Steyn)

Well Professor,
I don't know if this will help Steyn's case or not . . . But I like it.

>>>
Climate change hoax collapses as Michael Mann’s bogus “hockey stick” graph defamation lawsuit dismissed by the Supreme Court of British Columbia

http://www.climatesciencenews.com/2019-08-26-climate-change-hoax-collapses-as-michael-mann-bogus-hockey-stick-graph.html

08/26/2019
For the past two decades, much of the hysteria about global warming — later re-labeled “climate change” — has been based on the so-called “hockey stick” graph produced by Michael Mann. The graph, shown below, has been used by the IPCC, the media and governments to push global warming hysteria to the point of mass mental illness, where Democrat presidential candidates claim humanity only has 12 years remaining before a climate apocalypse will somehow destroy the planet.

But the hockey stick graph is a fraud. A man-made computer software algorithm generated it, and the algorithm is rigged to produce a hockey stick shape no matter what data were entered. Like everything else found in the rigged world of “climate science,” the hockey stick graph was a fraud the day it was generated.

Michael Mann didn’t like being called a fraud by his critics, so he sued them for defamation. And late last week, one of those lawsuits was concluded by the Supreme Court of British Columbia, Canada, which threw out Mann’s lawsuit against Dr. Tim Ball. But there’s more. According to Principia-Scientific:

Not only did the court grant Ball’s application for dismissal of the nine-year, multi-million dollar lawsuit, it also took the additional step of awarding full legal costs to Ball. A detailed public statement from the world-renowned skeptical climatologist is expected in due course.

This extraordinary outcome is expected to trigger severe legal repercussions for Dr Mann in the U.S. and may prove fatal to climate science claims that modern temperatures are “unprecedented.”
Michael Mann refuses to turn over the data behind the graph, insisting on secrecy instead of transparency
>>>

(Article does continue. Zim.)




Avatar

Mad Poet Strikes Again.


 - - - - -
View Replies (1) »



» You can also:
- - - - -
The above is a reply to the following message:
Hockey Stick - nonupdate
By: monkeytrots in GRITZ
Sun, 04 May 25 7:49 PM 		Msg. 07800 of 07843

Finding Grok to be quite useful in cutting down tedious 'net searches. Answers to well crafted questions are quite decent, and huge timesavers. The answers have to be read with the GIGO principle always in mind - they do produce results that CAN BE argued with (eg. in particular those about greenhouse gases I found some blatant errors due to a preponderance, imo, of bad input/biased source material for that particular question.

Anyhooz -

What is the current status of the 'hockey stick' lawsuit against Mark Stein ? ... err Steyn)

5 posts

15 web pages

The defamation lawsuit filed by climate scientist Michael Mann against Mark Steyn (often misspelled as "Stein") and Rand Simberg, related to the "hockey stick" graph, concluded with a significant verdict in February 2024. After a 12-year legal battle in the Washington, D.C. Superior Court, a jury unanimously found Steyn and Simberg guilty of defaming Mann. The lawsuit stemmed from 2012 blog posts where Simberg compared Mann’s work to the actions of convicted child molester Jerry Sandusky, and Steyn called Mann’s hockey stick graph "fraudulent." Mann was awarded $1 in compensatory damages from each defendant, $1,000 in punitive damages from Simberg, and $1,000,000 in punitive damages from Steyn.

Steyn has since appealed the verdict, arguing that the punitive damages—particularly the $1 million awarded against him—are excessive and unprecedented, citing a million-to-one ratio relative to the $1 compensatory damage. His appeal references legal precedents suggesting that such a ratio may violate due process, and he seeks a reduction or overturning of the award based on D.C. law, the First Amendment, or the Fifth Amendment’s Due Process Clause. The appeal process is ongoing, with no final resolution reported as of the latest available information from early 2025. Posts on X indicate continued public interest in the case, with some framing it as a free speech issue, though these are not conclusive evidence of the legal status.

The case remains in the appeals phase, with potential for further legal developments, possibly escalating to higher courts. No specific timeline for the appeal’s resolution is available.

Imo: The Jury was 100% incorrect and Mann's work is deeply fraudulent. Sorry to see that resolution of the case.

« GRITZ Home | Email msg. | Reply to msg. | Post new | Board info. Previous | Home | Next