Why Did Michael Mann Lose his Global Warming Lawsuit?

Written by John O'Sullivan

Rechtszaak Michael Mann versus Tim Ball nadert ontknoping ...

Apologists for discredited ‘climate scientist’ Michael E Mann have been trying to spin his defeat in the ‘science trial of the century’ versus skeptic climatologist, Dr Tim Ball.

Among the worst examples includes this weak effort ‘Tim Ball Pleads For Mercy As An Irrelevant Sick Old Man, Gets It, Declares Victory’ which serves only to fool the usual low-information class.

Mann’s case was dismissed because he didn’t comply with the rules of discovery – he failed to release the hidden r2 regression numbers demanded by Tim. Failure to comply with mandatory legal disclosure is almost always fatal to any lawsuit.

The writing was on the wall for Mann’s defeat in 2017, despite Michael Mann’s attorney, Roger McConchie making this absurd statement when Dr Ball won his ‘concessions‘ in the case:

“….plaintiff Michael Mann has fully complied with all of his disclosure obligations to the defendant Tim Ball relating to data and other documents.”  [Roger McConchie, Mann’s lawyer]

McConchie and Mann are well matched; claims as equally false and as empty as Mann’s chances of succeeding in any supposed appeal – the deadline for which expires on September 21, 2019.

Because, as Tim Ball said last week, after his epic victory:

“The Court Threw Out Mann’s Case Because He Failed To Provide Any Evidence To Support His Claims. The Specific Data He Claims He Presented Was Not Presented. The Court Also Agreed With Us That Mann Had Had From 2011 To Make His Case And Failed To Do So. In Fact, We Had A Trial Date Scheduled For February 20, 2017 But Mann Postponed The Trial And We Heard Nothing From Him Since.”                                       [Dr Tim Ball, Sept 06, 2019]

Three weeks on and corrupt media reporting ensures that the key issue of the withheld ‘hockey stick’ graph r2 regression numbers gets zero mention.

Wikipedia doesn’t even address Mann’s loss of what is now recognized as the ‘science trial of the century.’ See for yourself how Wikipedia disappears that matter here.

Such craven bias and dishonesty should tell any rational soul that mainstream (global elite) sources are utterly untrustworthy.

Anti-science alarmists can now only rely on the emotions of the ill-informed and brainwashed schoolchildren, just as did the failed dictators of the past.

Spin merchants will tell you that “all of Mann’s data has been released.” That is an easily proven lie. Any honest journalist questioning Mann on that fake claim is instantly blocked.

Dr Ball asserts that the hidden r2 numbers (Mann’s ‘working out’) would prove whether Mann deliberately or accidentally rigged his method.

While it is true other independent analysts have replicated Mann’s graph (because there is just sufficient of his data in the public domain to do so) those hidden r2 numbers (Mann’s ‘working out’) would prove conclusively if he created his graph with criminal intent.

As the 2006 the NAS affirmed:

Mann et al. used a type of principal component analysis that tends to bias the shape of the reconstructions”, i.e. produce hockey sticks from baseball statistics, telephone book numbers, and monte carlo random numbers.”

Based only on that limited access to the data, NAS agreed Mann was, at minimum, careless or incompetent. In 2006, the question of intentional fraud was left unanswered.

Taxpayers are entitled to now know the truth.

Ball’s epic 8-year win shows Mann would rather lose millions of dollars in his libel suit than allow anyone to verify that his hidden numbers are the smoking gun for intentional fraud.

As Tim Ball and PSI say: why would an innocent Mann go to such extremes to hide those numbers; even if they are “proprietary” what actual worth do they have on the open market?

Answer: Zero.

On September o5, 2019 Mann was featured on CCN endorsing Senator Elizabeth Warren for her climate change policies. The huge irony here is that ‘Elizabeth Warren thinks corruption is why the US hasn’t acted on climate change.’

Yes, Senator Warren, you are right, but you are looking in the wrong place!

Mann’s hockey stick graph has been the bedrock for needless mega trillion-dollar climate policies for 20 years. The self-described ‘Nobel Prize winner is still lauded by media zealots as the ‘world leading climate scientist.’ This week he is still threatening lawsuits and making ridiculous climate claims.

We argue Mann’s graph was criminally concocted as the iconic centerpiece of an elite criminal conspiracy to claim “unprecedented” modern temperatures.

Being that Mann has gone to such extraordinary lengths to cover up his misdeeds, we believe a full RICO investigation for racketeering is now in order.


PRINCIPIA SCIENTIFIC INTERNATIONAL, legally registered in the UK as a company incorporated for charitable purposes. Head Office: 27 Old Gloucester Street, London WC1N 3AX. 

Please DONATE TODAY To Help Our Non-Profit Mission To Defend The Scientific Method.

Comments (5)

  • Avatar

    Andy Rowlands

    |

    Excellent article John, that states the facts very well indeed.

    • Avatar

      John O'Sullivan

      |

      Thanks, Andy. Also check out my latest article for more revelations of corruption.

  • Avatar

    ClimatePoet

    |

    The brazen, school-child-esque lying of this miscreant — Michael Mann, the hockey stick falsifier — is beyond hilarity.

  • Avatar

    Wally

    |

    Let’s be honest here, Mann is a rabid Zionist and is therefore protected by Zionist interests. Therein lies the reason why Wikipedia has deleted, covered up Mann’s failure to provide data.
    – Zionist Wikipedia Editing Course
    http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/139189
    – How Israel and Its Partisans Work to Censor the Internet
    http://www.unz.com/article/how-israel-and-its-partisans-work-to-censor-the-internet/?highlight=wikipedia
    http://www.unz.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/IDFComputerSchool-600×337.jpg

  • Avatar

    Steve turner

    |

    We are about to go into a long cooling period, according to professor Valentina Zercorikof ( I may have spelt that wrong ) that is likely to be around 300 years. Her modelling has proven to be 97% accurate. So are we about to have another Moulder minimum?

Comments are closed