Michael Mann, the climatologist behind the infamous ‘hockey-stick graph,’ wins $1 million defamation lawsuit

I’ve given you links showing that the graph has held up.

you have made claims.

shrug.

The court said calling his work fraudulent was slander.

In his online post, Steyn had called Mann’s work “fraudulent.”

After a day of deliberations, the jury ruled that Simberg and Steyn defamed Mann through some of their statements.

What a dumb argument.

Whether we are weak or strong, in the blink of an eye we went from 0 man made emissions to our current levels…

To think so much being introduced into our ecosystem so fast would not have an affect is idiotic.

1 Like

Was the jury made up of scientists?

Which is far far far different than saying
“Mann’s prediction of a 0.5 deg C temperature increase in the years immediately following 1998 turned out to be true.”

In fact, Mann’s prediction turned out to be false.
More important his work conflated actual data form imagined/predicted scenarios.

Mainstream AGW theory might still be true, but Mann’s ideas are not mainstream. If you want folks to believe you, you should be willing to agree with science when science says Mann’s predictions were wrong.

1 Like

Common sense is, the amount of emersions added in the geological equivalent of a nanosecond would affect the fragile earth ecosystem.

And we’ve seen it before.

But this time will be different…

Then change your life. Walk to talk. Give up your house and move into a cave. Give up your car, your heater, your ac.

No more vacations. Go gather your food in the woods instead of a store.

You want to Pol Pot? You first.

1 Like

Show me.

When? Where? How? Who?

:rofl: They told you cow farts. And you believed them. You have any idea how many buffalo there were?

1 Like

Again?
Try reading it slowly this time.

3 Likes

do you deny that people (scientists ) dispute the climate hoax?

3 Likes

Meteor strikes. Volcanos.

When you disrupt our fragile system quickly (and when considering the age of the earth, there is not significant difference between hours of eruption and 150 years of emissions) things change.

Got any?

Ah, you’re equating “emissions” with acts of God? That’s a mistake.

You’re also ignoring resilience, adaptability and dare I say EVOLUTION!

You’re being had.

Yes, we need to be good stewards of the blessings. It is an obligation inherent to receiving them.

To believe that gas stoves and light bulbs are going to save the planet is insane. Cultish.

The “pEEr ReViEw LaB cOaTs” are gining you a virtue signal pacifier to suck on so you won’t notice their gands in your pocket.

2 Likes

“Who called his WORK fraudulent.”?

Not him?

:think’

This says otherwise:

https://www.nature.com/articles/s43247-023-01061-4

You have got to start evaluating the sources and authors of your links.

1 Like

Says the poster who never backs up his assertions with anything…

Don’t need to. I can destroy yours just by clicking.

1 Like

Here are some more: