• Welcome to the Internet Infidels Discussion Board.

More Left-Wing Abuse of the Courts for Political Repression Mann v. Steyn

 
 
 
Interesting how max ignores the comparisons of Mann to convicted child molester Jerry Sandusky.
 
ksen said:
Interesting how max ignores the comparisons of Mann to convicted child molester Jerry Sandusky.
Click to expand...

As I was discussing the suit against Steyn why should I discuss his accusation against the CEI? However, that said, it is worth repeating their accurate metaphor: ""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...".

Hyperbole, metaphor, but spot on.
 
ZiprHead said:
Interesting. How does one commit a fraudulent act and not be a fraud?
Click to expand...
How is being a fraud qualify as legal slander? It does not - name calling is part of the hyperbole of public discourse and an opinion.
 
maxparrish said:
ZiprHead said:
Interesting. How does one commit a fraudulent act and not be a fraud?
Click to expand...
How is being a fraud qualify as legal slander? It does not - name calling is part of the hyperbole of public discourse and an opinion.
Click to expand...

Mann has never been a fraud. Is no fraud. And has been repeatedly demonstrated to be on the up and up by repeated studies, 6 of them to date. You just keep lying on the facts and repeating debunked allegations. You just can't learn, can you? This is why libels suits are necessary.
 
maxparrish said:
ksen said:
Interesting how max ignores the comparisons of Mann to convicted child molester Jerry Sandusky.
Click to expand...

As I was discussing the suit against Steyn why should I discuss his accusation against the CEI? However, that said, it is worth repeating their accurate metaphor: ""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...".

Hyperbole, metaphor, but spot on.
Click to expand...

Steyn repeated and doubled down on the comparison with Sandusky.
 
maxparrish said:
Jimmy Higgins said:
Right-wing makes it so that Corporations have the right to free speech and freedom of religion and they complain about some minor judicial case and say the left-wing is abusing the courts.
Click to expand...
Yes...yes...nothing to see here. After all, the left is just better at attacking the free speech of those who oppose their agenda.
Click to expand...
I don't recall the White House Spokesman for a Democrat President saying to the Press Corp that Americans should "watch what they say, watch what they do". Or out a secret NOC-List CIA agent because of comments her husband made.

So what was you comment about liberals and attacking free speech.
 
ksen said:
maxparrish said:
As I was discussing the suit against Steyn why should I discuss his accusation against the CEI? However, that said, it is worth repeating their accurate metaphor: ""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...".

Hyperbole, metaphor, but spot on.
Click to expand...

Steyn repeated and doubled down on the comparison with Sandusky.
Click to expand...

In case you weren't aware it's paragraph 28 of the filed complaint.
 
ksen said:
ksen said:
Steyn repeated and doubled down on the comparison with Sandusky.
Click to expand...

In case you weren't aware it's paragraph 28 of the filed complaint.
Click to expand...

Steyn quoted Simberg, and wrote: "Not sure that I'd have extended that metaphor all the way into the locker-room showers with quite the zeal Mr. Simberg does, but he has a point. Michael Mann was the man behind the fraudulent climate-change "hockey stick graph, the very ringmaster of the tree-ring circus. "

Not that it matters, it is absolutely protected speech under the First Amendment.
 
Cheerful Charlie said:
Steyn still has a website
http://www.steynonline.com/6333/michael-e-mann-liar-cheat-falsifier-and-fraud

Michael E Mann: Liar, Cheat, Falsifier and Fraud

by Mark Steyn
May 13, 2014


----

Look at the date. He still has not learned. Truly a glutton for punishment.
Click to expand...

Look at the May date? Look at all his blogging TO DATE - Steyn has quite happily been mocking this suit in the same terms, and is relishing discovery (in fact, he has already provided Mann's team with everything they requested). Mann, of course, as in Tim Ball's case will do his best to NOT provide Steyn and N.R. and CEI with their requested material, when that time comes.

In the meantime, from TODAY's Steyn blog on "Dr Fraudpants":

Speaking of Steve McIntyre, he has resumed his series on the multiple misrepresentations of Dr Mann's so-called "exonerations" by official bodies. Along the way, he noticed this Tweet by one of the few scientists still willing to be associated with Mann, Gavin Schmidt, explaining why Doctor Fraudpants had no choice but to sue:

Saying that ppl are frauds is per se defamatory. Goes beyond disagreement/error/dislike

That's Mann's position. To a scientist an accusation of fraud - even from an unschooled disc-jockey dropout who quit school at nine (such as myself) - is professionally damaging. But, as Steve McIntyre points out, the EPA report Mann trumpets as one of his multiple "exonerations" addresses this very point. Mann had accused McIntyre and his colleague Ross McKitrick of "pure scientific fraud", which by Schmidt's lights is "per se defamatory". Aw, lighten up, says the EPA:

Mann's statements reflect his scientific judgment that the McIntyre and McKitrick (2005) paper was flawed. As discussed thoroughly in our previous responses (e.g., 3-23), it is entirely acceptable and appropriate for scientists to express their opinions and challenge papers that they believe are scientifically flawed.

So it's "entirely acceptable and appropriate" to dismiss something as "fraud" if you believe it's "scientifically flawed". Hey, that's great to know. Thanks a lot, EPA! Can't wait to see you on the witness stand.

~Thank you for your continued support of my pushback against Mann via the Steyn store and our SteynOnline gift certificates. It's a tough grind in the clogged toilet tank of DC justice, but I like the way the case is going, and even more so the way the broader debate is going.
Click to expand...
 
I'm glad Steyn is making a lot of money on this. That will make it easier for him to pay the damages Mann is going to be awarded.
 
ksen said:
I'm glad Steyn is making a lot of money on this. That will make it easier for him to pay the damages Mann is going to be awarded.
Click to expand...

It may be years before we know. If the appeals court decides it cannot hear an appeal on SLAPP, it might go to trial and THEN a motion for dismissal on other grounds may be filed. I would LOVE to see fight over the merits of "Dr. Fraudpants" claims. Like when they get him on the stand to explain how he can accuse others of "scientific fraud", or lie about being exonerated by several panels, or his "hide the decline" shenanigans, etc. Yep, the whole dirty and corrupt underside of climate science will be there for all to see.
 
maxparrish said:
ksen said:
I'm glad Steyn is making a lot of money on this. That will make it easier for him to pay the damages Mann is going to be awarded.
Click to expand...

It may be years before we know. If the appeals court decides it cannot hear an appeal on SLAPP, it might go to trial and THEN a motion for dismissal on other grounds may be filed. I would LOVE to see fight over the merits of "Dr. Fraudpants" claims. Like when they get him on the stand to explain how he can accuse others of "scientific fraud", or lie about being exonerated by several panels, or his "hide the decline" shenanigans, etc. Yep, the whole dirty and corrupt underside of climate science will be there for all to see.
Click to expand...
They don't even have to get to the fraud pants as they have the pedophile equivocation that clearly points to malicious intent.
 
Nice Squirrel said:
maxparrish said:
It may be years before we know. If the appeals court decides it cannot hear an appeal on SLAPP, it might go to trial and THEN a motion for dismissal on other grounds may be filed. I would LOVE to see fight over the merits of "Dr. Fraudpants" claims. Like when they get him on the stand to explain how he can accuse others of "scientific fraud", or lie about being exonerated by several panels, or his "hide the decline" shenanigans, etc. Yep, the whole dirty and corrupt underside of climate science will be there for all to see.
Click to expand...
They don't even have to get to the fraud pants as they have the pedophile equivocation that clearly points to malicious intent.
Click to expand...

Yeah, he can hardly claim innocence when he keeps doing what he was called on.
 
ksen said:
No, just the term 'Prophet Mannhammed' was funny.
Click to expand...

The data on global warming just keeps mounting and it doesn't look good considering the alignment of governments and politicians. If you want to call Mann a prophet, he was one of the earlier ones. Steyn's attacks on him have actually morphed into an anachronism. Global warming is a crisis requiring recognition and action and we still are subjected to childish ad homs and other insults to our intelligence.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom