Mann Defamation Trial Goes to Jury – IOTW Report

Mann Defamation Trial Goes to Jury

Thursday, 8 February 2024, 23:59 Dr. Tar Uncategorized 13

AP

It’s been 12 years since a pair of conservative writers compared a prominent climate scientist to a convicted child molester for his depiction of global warming. Now, a jury is about to decide whether the comments were defamatory. More

13 Comments on Mann Defamation Trial Goes to Jury

  1. My understanding is that Steyn lost and has to pay Mann $1M for defamation. I’d be glad to be wrong about this, but I think a verdict has already been reached.

    3

  3. The climate grifters only ever have one play at the end of the day
    They only extract.

    Like heat is extracted by alumininium
    They suck Green Cash from every molecule they meet
    They flood lies

    Cool Cool Water

    9

  5. The “law” is a cudgel.
    It is being (ab)used by maggots to silence truth.
    See: President Donald Trump, for instance, while known traitors and hoaxers walk free, unencumbered by frivolous lawsuits.
    How can one defame a known hoaxer? Speaking or writing a fact is NOT defamation.

    Globaloney Warming is, as stated earlier, complete horse shit, and the purveyors, thereof, are criminals – and child molester is apropos – seeing that the purveyors of the Globaloney Warming Hoax are profiting from the mentally weak, the stupid, the ignorant, the childish, and the retards.

    mortem tyrannis
    izlamo delenda est …

    14

  6. I couldn’t tell from the Article where the Trial is located. Reported from

    D.C. , If it’s in D.C. Kiss Your $$$ Goodbye.

    I hope that in the last few Years these Guys had time to hide Their Money.

    It’ll be something stupid like a $900 Million Settlement.

    6

  7. “Mann could be said to be the Jerry Sandusky of climate science, except for instead of molesting children, he has molested and tortured data,” Simberg wrote. Another writer, Mark Steyn, later referenced Simberg’s article in his own piece in National Review, calling Mann’s research “fraudulent.”

    Seems to me a motivated jury could simply find against Steyn because of the ‘child molester’ implication, regardless of globull warming BS. And, depending upon the location of the trial, I expect that is what will happen. And then Mann and his supporters will insist it is a vindication of globull warming, when it really is just about the child molester bit.

    9

  8. Be careful what you say about Mann. He’s probably got a team of lawyers using AI right now to search the entire internet for people he can sue for “defamation”.

    6

  9. It drives me nuts to see articles like this blur the line between natural climate change and artificial man-caused climate change. Long ago the media stopped making that distinction and now uses the generic ‘Climate Change’ (always refer to religions with Capital Letters) to imply what we call andromorphic (spelling?) climate change. Nobody denies that the climate is changing. Others like me question the effects of Human activity on accelerating that change. By being purposefully vague about the kind of change they talk about, the media makes it seem like we are denying that the climate is changing AT ALL. Dishonest and deceitful, this is.

    8

  12. @Vincent Knauff: can I sue for defamation? I have been accused of being a climate change “denier” although I have consistently maintained that the earth’s climate has been changing for, oh, 4 and 1/2 billion years or so. The question I usually ask these folks, which no one has really answered, is “how much climate change is caused by human activities?”

    I feel my reputation has been damaged by the Michael Manns of the world, and that I am entitled to damages of $1.34.

    5

Comments are closed.

iOTWreport.com ©2024 ----- iOTWreport is not responsible for the content of comments. All opinions in comments are solely the commenter's.