• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Michael Mann's Bad Behavior

maxparrish said:
I have no objection to you providing us a grotesquely illiterate reading of the court order, but I do object when you can't even make your disingenuous posting at least entertaining.

You might spare us the 'hand-waving fool' act and now acknowledge what was already posted all along - Ball won because Mann's legal antics were no longer tolerated. The judge was unsparing in his criticism of Mann and his team:

1) There were two extensive periods of delay, of which nothing was done for a total of three years. As it stands, it would not have gone to trial not less than 10 years after the suit was filed by Mann.

2) These delays by Mann and his attorneys were not excusable. There was no evidence from Mann explaining his inordinate delaying. He simply ignored requests to explain the delay in filings. The evidence falls fall short of explaining the two long delays, from 2013 and 2014 and then again from July 2017 forward.

3) The delaying was with prejudice. "Thus, in addition to finding that presumption of prejudice has not been rebutted (by Mann), I also find that there has been actual prejudice to the defendant as a consequence of the delay." (i.e. three of Ball's witnesses have died since the suit was filed 8 years ago, and a fourth is no longer healthy enough to travel).

The judge concluded:



Which, I think, pretty much sums up the venal character of Mann.
Click to expand...

The lawsuit wasn’t ‘won’... it was dismissed.

And the plaintiff has a whole lot of other things to do than work on the case, and pay the legal bills. That’s his prerogative since he was the one who brought it. He obviously didn’t give it a whole lot of attention, but then again, Ball really doesn’t deserve much, given the fact other lawsuits against him were dropped because he was considered a foddering fool no one listens to anyway.

And yes... the only witnesses Ball could get were a bunch of old guys who are dying off, because the science has moved on to the point where only senile idiots can argue that Mann’s work is ‘fraudulent’.
 
Dr Mann had already won the important part of the case anyway. Frontier Centre for Public Policy retracted Tim Ball's letters and apologized to Michael Mann for publishing "untrue and disparaging comments" and that "it was wrong to suggest that Michael Mann was guilty of any dishonesty concerning his 1997 and 1998 research which produced the so-called "Hockey Stick" temperature graph."

View attachment 67262674

Michael E. Mann took climate change deniers to court. They apologized.

Having the case dismissed for delay probably doesn’t phase Mann too much now anyway. During that time Tim Ball had continued to build a reputation as such an old crank nutter that no one takes him seriously anyway. He rejects the theory of evolution. He even rejects the existence of the earth’s natural ‘greenhouse’ effect and the laws of physics. He rants about bizarre conspiracies and he lies about his academic credentials.

I laugh every time climate science deniers hold Ball up as a some kind of bastion of science.
 
Last edited:
Quaestio said:
Dr Mann had already won the important part of the case anyway. Frontier Centre for Public Policy retracted Tim Ball's letters and apologized to Michael Mann for publishing "untrue and disparaging comments" and that "it was wrong to suggest that Michael Mann was guilty of any dishonesty concerning his 1997 and 1998 research which produced the so-called "Hockey Stick" temperature graph."

View attachment 67262674

Michael E. Mann took climate change deniers to court. They apologized.

Having the case dismissed for delay probably doesn’t phase Mann too much now anyway. During that time Tim Ball had continued to build a reputation as such an old crank nutter that no one takes him seriously anyway. He rejects the theory of evolution. He even rejects the existence of the earth’s natural ‘greenhouse’ effect and the laws of physics. He rants about bizarre conspiracies and he lies about his academic credentials.

I laugh every time climate science deniers hold Ball up as a some kind of bastion of science.
Click to expand...

I’m sure Jack Hays is anxiously waiting for deniers to post a retort on their blogs so he will have an opinion to state....errrr....cut and paste.
 
Quaestio said:
Dr Mann had already won the important part of the case anyway. Frontier Centre for Public Policy retracted Tim Ball's letters and apologized to Michael Mann for publishing "untrue and disparaging comments" and that "it was wrong to suggest that Michael Mann was guilty of any dishonesty concerning his 1997 and 1998 research which produced the so-called "Hockey Stick" temperature graph."

View attachment 67262674

Michael E. Mann took climate change deniers to court. They apologized.

Having the case dismissed for delay probably doesn’t phase Mann too much now anyway. During that time Tim Ball had continued to build a reputation as such an old crank nutter that no one takes him seriously anyway. He rejects the theory of evolution. He even rejects the existence of the earth’s natural ‘greenhouse’ effect and the laws of physics. He rants about bizarre conspiracies and he lies about his academic credentials.

I laugh every time climate science deniers hold Ball up as a some kind of bastion of science.
Click to expand...
I guess the real question come down to who will have to pay the court costs?
 
Mark Steyn’s special motion to dismiss just got denied with prejudice.


033FD0A7-E7F2-43A6-BB99-7E389604196B.webp


Steyn should stick with singing stupid creepy songs about *****cats


 
Last edited:
Threegoofs said:
Court transcript was finally released.

The case was dismissed because Ball is too old.

It had nothing to do with any of the science being shown to be wrong, and the judge made it clear that was never going to be litigated anyway.



2019 BCSC 1580 Mann v. Ball
Click to expand...

Hmmm. #200 is a crushing rebuttal to your nonsense.
 
Quaestio said:
Mark Steyn’s special motion to dismiss just got denied with prejudice.


View attachment 67264147


Steyn should stick with singing stupid creepy songs about *****cats


Click to expand...


Weird that this is dated August 29th, but there is nary a peep about this on any of the denier blogs.

The same denier blogs that trumpeted this lawsuit as a great, righteous cause and a sure winner.

Mark Steyn has not said a thing on it either, despite multiple posts/articles crowing about how Mann ‘lost’ the Ball case, which he wasnt even involved in.

It’s almost like the deniers are... denying what happened.

Meanwhile, here’s Mann’s lawyers statement:

a685ae91cc3beb043a1ca7418b7321ed.jpg
 
Threegoofs said:
Weird that this is dated August 29th, but there is nary a peep about this on any of the denier blogs.

The same denier blogs that trumpeted this lawsuit as a great, righteous cause and a sure winner.

Mark Steyn has not said a thing on it either, despite multiple posts/articles crowing about how Mann ‘lost’ the Ball case, which he wasnt even involved in.

It’s almost like the deniers are... denying what happened.
Click to expand...

That's because it's of no consequence. Steyn's countersuit was dismissed quite a while ago.
 
Threegoofs said:
It was dismissed this summer.

And to absolute crickets in denier circles, naturally.

But they were oh! So excited when it began.

An example: Steyn et al. versus Mann | Climate Etc.
Click to expand...

That's because Steyn's countersuit (always just a prod to try to get Mann to move his lawsuit (Mann v Steyn) along and stop stalling) was known to be dead in the water long ago. In the central case, Mann v Steyn, Mann continues the delaying tactics that failed versus Ball, and will likely (someday) also fail against Steyn. Mann is still cornered by his refusal to show his work.

[FONT=&quot][/FONT]
[h=1]Michael E Mann, Loser[/h][FONT=&quot]From Steyn Online Mark Steyn eloquently evicerates Mann’s blathering online about not really losing to Tim Ball. For a start, although Mann always presents himself as the victim, it is important to remember that, in this case as in mine, he is the plaintiff: He chose to sue – and without that conscious choice there…
2 hours ago September 20, 2019 in Michael E. Mann.
[/FONT]
 
Jack Hays said:
That's because Steyn's countersuit (always just a prod to try to get Mann to move his lawsuit (Mann v Steyn) along and stop stalling) was known to be dead in the water long ago. In the central case, Mann v Steyn, Mann continues the delaying tactics that failed versus Ball, and will likely (someday) also fail against Steyn. Mann is still cornered by his refusal to show his work.

[FONT=&quot][/FONT]
[h=1]Michael E Mann, Loser[/h][FONT=&quot]From Steyn Online Mark Steyn eloquently evicerates Mann’s blathering online about not really losing to Tim Ball. For a start, although Mann always presents himself as the victim, it is important to remember that, in this case as in mine, he is the plaintiff: He chose to sue – and without that conscious choice there…
2 hours ago September 20, 2019 in Michael E. Mann.
[/FONT]
Click to expand...

Again... Steyn doesn’t even comment that his own lawsuit was thrown out ‘with prejudice’.

I guess you don’t say that stuff out loud when you need to keep the grift going.
 
Threegoofs said:
Again... Steyn doesn’t even comment that his own lawsuit was thrown out ‘with prejudice’.

I guess you don’t say that stuff out loud when you need to keep the grift going.
Click to expand...

Again, that's because it was not news. The "grift" is now 3-0 against the climate fraudsters.
 
Threegoofs said:
The lawsuit wasn’t ‘won’... it was dismissed.

And the plaintiff has a whole lot of other things to do than work on the case, and pay the legal bills. That’s his prerogative since he was the one who brought it. He obviously didn’t give it a whole lot of attention, but then again, Ball really doesn’t deserve much, given the fact other lawsuits against him were dropped because he was considered a foddering fool no one listens to anyway.

And yes... the only witnesses Ball could get were a bunch of old guys who are dying off, because the science has moved on to the point where only senile idiots can argue that Mann’s work is ‘fraudulent’.
Click to expand...

I don't know where you live, but in my country it is undisputed that when a defendant wins by dismissal or full trial, they WIN. And win he did, not only with getting dismissal but also with adding on "with prejudice", which means that Ball cannot have the suit reinstated against him - and, I should add, is now due for costs for lawyers and monetary damages (e.g. lost contracts or wages) for the last 8 years.
 
maxparrish said:
I don't know where you live, but in my country it is undisputed that when a defendant wins by dismissal or full trial, they WIN. And win he did, not only with getting dismissal but also with adding on "with prejudice", which means that Ball cannot have the suit reinstated against him - and, I should add, is now due for costs for lawyers and monetary damages (e.g. lost contracts or wages) for the last 8 years.
Click to expand...

No. The plaintiff paid the costs to bring the suit - court costs, as specified in the ruling.

Mann is not paying Ball’s legal fees, or any other monetary damages.

But I’m sure your denier sources say differently, because lying is just their thing.
 
Birdzeye said:
The OP source is a tinfoil hat site that peddles conspiracy theories. How about a credible source instead.
Click to expand...

"Credible" in your understanding means a source that agrees with you and Al Gore and all the *scholars* who are raking in billions of dollars to keep peddling lies and extremist rhetoric.

Dear God, Please give trump a well deserved retirement, preferably starting no later than January 20, 2021.
Click to expand...

Look out! Another one of those "Bible Thumpers". Dear God already gave America the miracle of Hillary losing despite cheating, support of all the Fake Media, corruption, incompetence, selling 20% of America's uranium to Russia, killing four men at Benghazi and then covering it up, illegal servers in her home which she covered up. She represents all that is wrong with America and Democrats swooned over her. Until she lost, big time. Wah, wah.
http://HatefulHillary.blogspot.com
 
MrWonderful said:
"Credible" in your understanding means a source that agrees with you and Al Gore and all the *scholars* who are raking in billions of dollars to keep peddling lies and extremist rhetoric.



Look out! Another one of those "Bible Thumpers". Dear God already gave America the miracle of Hillary losing despite cheating, support of all the Fake Media, corruption, incompetence, selling 20% of America's uranium to Russia, killing four men at Benghazi and then covering it up, illegal servers in her home which she covered up. She represents all that is wrong with America and Democrats swooned over her. Until she lost, big time. Wah, wah.
http://HatefulHillary.blogspot.com
Click to expand...

ahem... I smell hypocrisy:

MrWonderful said:
Are you another person who changes the subject in a discourteous attempt to discredit someone who does not interpret data and facts in the same manner that you do? The age of the earth has nothing to do with the discussion. Stop trying to derail the thread. That is a violation of the rules.
Click to expand...
Your hysterical Hilary rant has nothing to do with this thread.
 
[FONT=&quot]Climate ugliness[/FONT]
[h=1]Michael Mann just stepped in it.[/h][FONT=&quot]Dr. Mann runs his mouth again, and this time I think he’s made a huge mistake. Personally, with what knowledge I have of libel law, I think this is actionable under Canadian law as well as US law, and I hope that Steve McIntyre takes Dr. Mann to task legally. Here is a screencap: The…
[/FONT]
 
Jack Hays said:
[FONT=&quot]Climate ugliness[/FONT]
[h=1]Michael Mann just stepped in it.[/h][FONT=&quot]Dr. Mann runs his mouth again, and this time I think he’s made a huge mistake. Personally, with what knowledge I have of libel law, I think this is actionable under Canadian law as well as US law, and I hope that Steve McIntyre takes Dr. Mann to task legally. Here is a screencap: The…
[/FONT]
Click to expand...

Oh look, the guys who cheered on Mann being compared to a convicted child molester are upset that their favorite liar is called out as a liar.

Funnier still, he wrote a book (and directed people to it!) painstakingly describing what a whore McIntyre is years ago, devoting an entire chapter to it. And suddenly, a short tweet is what twists the denier panties.

Yawn
 
[FONT=&quot][/FONT]
[h=1]McIntyre speaks: on Mann, sticks, and data mannipulation[/h][FONT=&quot]I interviewed Steve McIntyre, founder of the blog Climate Audit, about his journey into climate science and debunking the infamous ‘hockey stick.’ This is the most in-depth interview with Steve McIntyre ever to be published, and there’s a bonus secret revealed at the end. Steve McIntyre, founder and editor of the blog dedicated to analysis…
Continue reading →
[/FONT]
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom