The end of the climate change hoax?

Via Thomas Lifson.

TL;DR version:

Michael Mann, the guy who claimed a graph of global temperature rise in the late 1990s resembled a hockey stick, sued a skeptic, Dr. Tim Ball, who publicly said Mann “belongs in the state pen, not Penn. State”. The libel lawsuit has now been dismissed because Mann refused to show the court the data and math by which he produced the graph. The lawsuit took six years, cost millions of (Canadian) dollars, and Mann has been told to pay the legal fees.

It is becoming more and more clear that a criminal conspiracy case against Mann and others regarding the climate change hoax is valid.

Read various quotes and get the links to the entire story below.

Interesting reading from July 4, 2017:

Penn State climate scientist, Michael ‘hockey stick’ Mann commits contempt of court in the ‘climate science trial of the century.’ Prominent alarmist shockingly defies judge and refuses to surrender data for open court examination. Only possible outcome: Mann’s humiliation, defeat and likely criminal investigation in the U.S.

The defendant in the libel trial, the 79-year-old Canadian climatologist, Dr Tim Ball (above, right) is expected to instruct his British Columbia attorneys to trigger mandatory punitive court sanctions, including a ruling that Mann did act with criminal intent when using public funds to commit climate data fraud. Mann’s imminent defeat is set to send shock waves worldwide within the climate science community as the outcome will be both a legal and scientific vindication of U.S. President Donald Trump’s claims that climate scare stories are a “hoax.”

As can be seen from the graphs below; Mann’s cherry-picked version of science makes the Medieval Warm Period (MWP) disappear and shows a pronounced upward ‘tick’ in the late 20th century (the blade of his ‘hockey stick’). But below that, Ball’s graph, using more reliable and widely available public data, shows a much warmer MWP, with temperatures hotter than today, and showing current temperatures well within natural variation.


Update from last Friday:

Supreme Court of British Columbia dismisses Dr Michael Mann’s defamation lawsuit versus Canadian skeptic climatologist, Dr Tim Ball. Full legal costs are awarded to Dr Ball, the defendant in the case.

The Canadian court issued it’s final ruling in favor of the Dismissal motion that was filed in May 2019 by Dr Tim Ball’s libel lawyers.

The plaintiff Mann’s “hockey stick” graph, first published in 1998, was featured prominently in the U.N. 2001 climate report. The graph showed an “unprecedented” spike in global average temperature in the 20th Century after about 500 years of stability.

Skeptics have long claimed Mann’s graph was fraudulent.

Not only did the B.C. Supreme Court grant Ball’s application for dismissal of the 8-year, multi-million dollar lawsuit, it also took the additional step of awarding full legal costs to Ball.

This extraordinary outcome will likely trigger severe legal repercussions for Dr Mann in the U.S. and may prove fatal to alarmist climate science claims that modern temperatures are “unprecedented.”

Dr Ball’s legal team adroitly pursued the ‘truth defense’ such that the case boiled down to whether Ball’s words (“belongs in the state pen, not Penn State”) after examining the key evidence (Mann’s R2 regression numbers) fairly and accurately portrayed Mann.

The aim was to compel the plaintiff (Dr. Mann) to show his math ‘working out’ to check if he knowingly and criminally misrepresented his claims by resorting to statistical fakery (see: ‘Mike’s trick‘ below).

In the pre-trial Discovery Process the parties are required to surrender the cited key evidence in reasonable fashion, that they believe proves or disproves the Claim.

Despite Ball’s best efforts over 8 years, Mann would not agree to surrender to an open court his math ‘working out’ –  those arcane R2 regression numbers for his graph.

Readers interested in gaining a deeper understanding of what is likely to eventually be exposed as a criminal conspiracy between Mann and other ‘elite’ researchers should see “The Hockey Stick Illusion” by Andrew Montford.


14 thoughts on “The end of the climate change hoax?

  1. I doubt that it is over. This news will be accepted by us and rejected by the believers.

    • The matter was removed from the purview of science and turned over to a Sharia-like religion/political system long ago.

  2. Joe, what are you using for spam/bot protection? The above apparently means “Hello everyone, I’m new here”, according to Google Translate. I’m going to go out on a limb to say that is literally a bot that is trying to be Russian.

    • Akismet Anti-Spam.

      It seems to do a great job. Dozens of spam comments are caught every day. False negatives are about one a week. Maybe one or two false positives per month.

      It missed this one. I did the translation at essentially the same time as you did. Arrived at the same conclusion.

      Thank you!

  3. I expect that if it becomes impossible to keep catastrophic human-caused global warming as part of the Leftist creed, plastics in all the food will become the next human-caused catastrophe we will need to forfeit our liberty and freedom of thought to. Every day there is some new article about where plastics have been found now. Combine that with the Leftist primacy of health and that is the next “inconvenient truth.” Fifty years ago plastics were assailed as not biodegradable; the non-radioactive version of something we throw away today and which 20,000 years from now someone will dig it up, rinse it off, and it is as clean as when it was new. To answer that objection, formulas were altered so the plastic would break down into small pieces in what was called then biodegradability. Unnoticed at the time was the fact that the little bits of plastic were indistinguishable from the bits of biomass many animals ate. Now it’s almost as if they are pulling out the hidden card and we’re supposed to panic from eating plastic. How much is bio-available and is anybody studying that, or are we supposed to go all Rachel Carson like we did almost sixty years ago over her “scientistic”* book “Silent Spring.”

    * An adjective for the concept of Scientism, the dressing up of superstitious beliefs in the jargon and costume of Science. Whenever someone says “The science is settled” you know you’re dealing with a follower of Scientism, not a Scientist, who knows that his theory, backed up by his experiment if someone else can repeat it, is only as good as that replication.

    • Thanks. I’ll add this to my list of climate fads for 2020s (1970s: We’re all gonna freeze, we’re gonna run out of oil, we’re all gonna starve, …)

  4. Yeah, at this point there is no amount of proof that can convince the Mesmerized leftists that anthropogenic “climate change” was a hoax. At this point every leftist, every Progressive, and every “liberal” walks outside every day and sees “proof” of “climate change” in everything they see, smell, hear, taste and feel. It has been so deeply engrain into them that it is part of their daily life experience and their very identity. You cannot separate a leftist from AGW anymore than you can separate a tortoise from its shell. They’ll die first.

    THEREFORE; all they can possibly do is double down.

    BESIDES; the pope has already gone all-in on “climate change” and when the pope does it there’s never any turning back. You have to understand how this works; a pope can never be that wrong. So if it comes down to a clear, significant and irreconcilable difference between AGW and reality, it will be reality that has it wrong. Therefore they must wage open war against reality (which, when you think about it, the Romish powers have been doing all along).

    Don’t EVER believe that, just because you’re right, you’re safe. You’re in danger, you’re a target, precisely because you’re right. The court may have been hog-tied in this case, leaving them no way out, but that doesn’t mean The Powers That Should Not Be will just roll over and admit defeat as a global conspiracy, and then use their own media and their own academia to repent, and declare, to the whole world, their shameless and despicable criminality. They’re far too powerful to have to resort to that. There’s always a way to weasel out of anything, no matter how bad it looks, if the alliance is on your side. Surely, Bill and Hillary Clinton proved that.

    The only thing that stops a committed leftist is the scenario of Hitler and his cronies in the bunker in Berlin on the day the Allied Forces surrounded them. In that case they never repent, neither do they face the full reality of their crimes in open trial. The last gesture in their war against reality is to destroy themselves, but only after all possibility of destroying other people has been taken away (stolen) from them. Likewise a pope can never repent, nor countermand the decrees of a previous pope. It is built into their system that it is impossible, for it would destroy their “infallibility” assertion, upon which the whole system, their whole universe, rests. The power of the United States is already committed to supporting that system too, so forget about any fantasy of global justice on the matter of the climate change hoax.

  5. Just remember: immigration into developed countries from low-energy-footprint countries will increase the immigrants energy use, and destroy the planet faster. mass migration causes global warming! You can’t promote both amnesty AND AGW unless you are a fool, a moron, or evil.

  6. When Greenland is warm enough to SUPPORT colonies, the climate may be warm enough. Prior to that, we are too cold! The Vikings were doing this, and found grapes growing into eastern Canada! Screw these know-nothing babbling idiots, and their evil handlers.

  7. Pingback: Hide the Decline | The View From North Central Idaho

Comments are closed.