Friday, June 07, 2019

Michael Mann Wins a Court Case

Michael Mann and the The Frontier Centre for Public Policy Inc. have settled their case in the Canadian Supreme Court, with the Frontier Centre issuing a retraction & apology:


Mann sued Tim Ball and the Frontier Centre for libel. From Forbes 2012, where Larry Bell predicted the wrong outcome:
The first law suit was filed against Canadian climate scientist Timothy Ball who humorously commented  in an interview published by the Frontier Center for Public Policy, a Winnipeg think tank, that Penn State researcher Mann should, instead, be in the state pen.
Mann says he has not settled his claims against Tim Ball, who remains a defendant in the lawsuit. We'll see about that "humor."

--
Tim Ball's scientific reputation has already been shredded in a Canadian court, as it's been admitted in a court of law that he is not a climate science expert.

After the Calgary Herald published an op-ed by Ball on April 19, 2006, whom the newspaper identified as the first climatology PhD in Canada and a climatology professor at the University of Winnipeg for 28 years, they published a letter on April 23, 2006 from Dr. Dan Johnson, a professor at the University of Lethbridge, who pointed out that neither of those descriptions is true; that Dr. Ball's credentials were being seriously overstated. Ball later threatened Johnson and the Herald and ultimately sued for defamation.

In their Statement of Defense filed in Court, the Calgary Herald submitted the following:

1. "...that the Plaintiff (Ball) never held a reputation in the scientific community as a noted climatologist and authority on global warming.

2. "The Plaintiff has never published any research in any peer-reviewed scientific journal which addressed the topic of human contributions to greenhouse gas emissions and global warming

3. "The Plaintiff has published no papers on climatology in academically recognized peer-reviewed scientific journals since his retirement as a Professor in 1996;

4. "The Plaintiff's credentials and credibility as an expert on the issue of global warming have been repeatedly disparaged in the media; and

5. "The Plaintiff is viewed as a paid promoter of the agenda of the oil and gas industry rather than as a practicing scientist."

Ball dropped his lawsuit.....

Source: The Calgary Herald, Statement of Defense – paragraph 50, Dr Tim Ball v The Calgary Herald, In the Court of the Queen’s Bench of Alberta Judicial District of Calgary, Dec 7, 2006 (http://is.gd/brO4uO).

More at:
http://www.desmogblog.com/tim-ball-vs-dan-johnson-update-0
http://www.desmogblog.com/tim-ball-vs-dan-johnson-lawsuit-documents
http://www.desmogblog.com/ball-bails-on-johnson-lawsuit

8 comments:

ncdave4life said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
ncdave4life said...

I’d never heard of Canada's “Frontier Centre,” but for a rundown of Jones' & Mann's dishonest substitution of measurement data for proxies, to “hide the decline” in embarrassingly wrong proxy temperatures while real temps were increasing, see:

https://sealevel.info/climategate.html

Take a look at the deceptive graph which they created for the 1999 WMO Climate Report cover:

https://sealevel.info/wmo_1999_climate_report_cover_hockey_stick_jones_bradley_mann_hughes_rounded_splice_points.html

You can certainly see why that scientific malpractice horrified so many people, including Prof. Richard Muller. Here's his short but excellent discussion of it:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8BQpciw8suk

Here's Steve McIntyre's much more thorough discussion:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SqzcA7SsqSA

David Appell said...

ncdave:

Do you know what "hide the decline" referred to?

Have you heard of the divergence problem?

“On the ‘Divergence Problem’ in Northern Forests: A review of the
tree-ring evidence and possible causes,” Rosanne D'Arrigo et al, Global and Planetary Change 60 (2008) 289–305.
http://www.ldeo.columbia.edu/~liepert/pdf/DArrigo_etal.pdf

How would you have preferred to solve the divergence problem?

ncdave4life said...

David Appell asked, "Do you know what "hide the decline" referred to?"

That is a strange question, David. Did you even read the comment to which you replied?

I told you exactly what "hide the decline" referred to. It was:

"Jones' & Mann's dishonest substitution of measurement data for proxies, to 'hide the decline' in embarrassingly wrong proxy temperatures while real temps were increasing, see: https://sealevel.info/climategate.html"

How is that unclear?

Jones, Mann, Bradley & Hughes created a deceptive spliced graph, to hide the divergence problem. Their graph which graced the cover of the 1999 WMO Climate Report (which did not mention the divergence problem).

David Appell said...

"....in embarrassingly wrong proxy temperatures while real temps were increasing...."

Why was/is this embarrassing? Embarrassing why?

ncdave4life said...

The inconsistency of the proxy derivations with reality (i.e., the "divergence problem") means that the proxy-based temperature derivations, upon which the "hockey stick" was based, are untrustworthy.

Layzej said...

Seems reasonable to use measurements if the proxy was considered untrustworthy, but Michael Mann's nature paper included both proxy reconstruction and actual measurements together. One in blue and one in red to clearly delineate. Not sure what's dishonest about displaying all available data.

David Appell said...

ncdave4life:
"The inconsistency of the proxy derivations with reality (i.e., the "divergence problem") means that the proxy-based temperature derivations, upon which the "hockey stick" was based, are untrustworthy."

I don't see how. It means that the mismatch DURING THAT TIME FRAME doesn't work, which I understand means 1960 onward.

Am I wrong? Admitting the mismatch > 1960 is, in fact, an indication of scientific *integrity* on MBH's part.

“On the ‘Divergence Problem’ in Northern Forests: A review of the
tree-ring evidence and possible causes,” Rosanne D'Arrigo et al, Global and Planetary Change 60 (2008) 289–305.
http://www.ldeo.columbia.edu/~liepert/pdf/DArrigo_etal.pdf