Could A Climate Scientist’s Defamation Suit Shut Down TNR?

That would be awesomeness. It's past time to stop the BS of hard-core deniers saying the sh** they do. And before you get your panties in a bunch :BroadGrin: do some research on how many times Michael Mann has been forced to court, or been harassed over his research. No other single piece of scientific data has been more duplicated by additional labs to confirm its reliability and accuracy, yet the personal attacks against him and other climate scientist continued. And NOT ONCE has his research been disproven.

At some point those who continue to parade the mantra of "global warming isn't real", "global warming isn't man-made", and "global warming will kill our economy if we try to do anything about it, it's just a Green religion that Al Gore has foisted on us to make money" need to be held accountable for the damage they cause because we aren't doing enough about it yet. We have no international agreement to reduce carbon use. I hope this defamation suit is just the beginning. Next up: The Heritage Foundation.

Could A Climate Scientist’s Defamation Suit Shut Down The Nation’s Leading Conservative Magazine?
"The National Review has held great influence among Republicans and conservative thought leaders for nearly 60 years, but a lawsuit from a climate scientist could threaten its very existence.

Michael Mann’s defamation suit against Mark Steyn and the National Review took another step forward last month, with D.C. Superior Court Judge Frederick Weisberg again rejecting a motion to dismiss the suit."

http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2014/0 ... efamation/

Go Mark Steyn.

So Wicked, when the prevailing science in the 1960's said homosexuality was a mental illness, you would have been fine if people who refused to accept this misdiagnosis weren't allowed to speak?

Be careful whose mouth you staple shut, one day it might be yours.

Wicked wrote: That would be awesomeness.

http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2014/0 ... efamation/

Awesome. Why stop there? Muzzle everyone who does not toe the party line. Once that is done it will be so much easier to execute them. It worked so well for the USSR.

Perhaps you should wait until the suite is settled before you warm up the gas chambers.


"FEC CHAIRMAN: FEC CLAIMS POWER TO CENSOR NEWS
Writing in the Journal today, new Federal Elections Commission Chairman Lee Goodman notes that in a recent decision, the commission wrongly asserted the authority to judge whether TV political coverage is objective. The government official wisely notes that "government officials cannot be trusted to regulate journalists fairly and without bias. For precisely that reason, Congress prohibited the FEC from regulating the news media's exercise of editorial discretion."

SPEAKING OF REGULATING POLITICAL SPEECH...
If there was "not even a smidgen of corruption" at the IRS, as President Obama now claims, a Journal editorial asks why former IRS official Lois Lerner had to plead the Fifth.

...

online.wsj.com

BlazerBob wrote:
SPEAKING OF REGULATING POLITICAL SPEECH...
If there was "not even a smidgen of corruption" at the IRS, as President Obama now claims, a Journal editorial asks why former IRS official Lois Lerner had to plead the Fifth.

And why didn't Obama use the usual liberal tactic of "it's still an ongoing investigation so I can't give an opinion". It's nice to know Obama has all the details and verdict of an ongoing investigation, but has no clue about anything else unless he sees it in the news. Pretty sad how many times this guy lies.

Wicked wrote: That would be awesomeness. It's past time to stop the BS of hard-core deniers saying the sh** they do. And before you get your panties in a bunch :BroadGrin: do some research on how many times Michael Mann has been forced to court, or been harassed over his research. No other single piece of scientific data has been more duplicated by additional labs to confirm its reliability and accuracy, yet the personal attacks against him and other climate scientist continued. And NOT ONCE has his research been disproven.

At some point those who continue to parade the mantra of "global warming isn't real", "global warming isn't man-made", and "global warming will kill our economy if we try to do anything about it, it's just a Green religion that Al Gore has foisted on us to make money" need to be held accountable for the damage they cause because we aren't doing enough about it yet. We have no international agreement to reduce carbon use. I hope this defamation suit is just the beginning. Next up: The Heritage Foundation.

Could A Climate Scientist’s Defamation Suit Shut Down The Nation’s Leading Conservative Magazine?
"The National Review has held great influence among Republicans and conservative thought leaders for nearly 60 years, but a lawsuit from a climate scientist could threaten its very existence.

Michael Mann’s defamation suit against Mark Steyn and the National Review took another step forward last month, with D.C. Superior Court Judge Frederick Weisberg again rejecting a motion to dismiss the suit."

http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2014/0 ... efamation/

Or perhaps Mark Steyn will expose Michael Mann.

http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2 ... empire.php

"MARK STEYN STRIKES BACK AGAINST THE EMPIRE
As all the world knows, climate buffoon Michael Mann is suing Mark Steyn, National Review and others for disagreeing with him about global warming–not just disagreeing, but doing so in colorful language. As happens so often on the Left, Mann found himself losing the debate on a public issue of great importance. Rather than admit that he was wrong about the hockey stick–one of the most notorious errors, or frauds, in the history of science–he is trying to shut his opponents up through litigation.

Steyn was unhappy with how the lawsuit was going, so he dismissed the lawyers that were representing him and National Review and is now pro se. Rather than engage in further procedural maneuvering, Mark wants to fight out what he sees as the central issue–free speech–in the court of public opinion. So yesterday another shoe dropped: Mark served an answer and counterclaim against Mann in which he requested damages from the discredited scientist. You can read the pleading here. It is entertaining; it should be, Mark wrote it himself."...