Michael Mann, a climatologist at the University of Pennsylvania, will have to pay National Review more than $500,000 in legal fees, nearly 13 years after the legal battle began.
Mann first sued National Review in 2012 after Canadian conservative commentator Mark Stein criticized him in a post on National Review's website. National Review editor Rich Lowery then wrote a follow-up article defending Mr. Stein's criticism, and Mr. Mann chose to sue the magazine for defamation. A judge in Washington, D.C., ruled this week that Mann must pay nearly $531,000 within 30 days as part of the store's legal costs, National Review editors said.・Review editor stated. announced Friday. (Related: Scientist turns lecture on academic freedom into rant against 'climate change deniers')
This is what both the scumbag Rich Lowry (editor-in-chief of the disgusting National Review) and the New York Times were disparaged for: pic.twitter.com/JhmacBNl2L
— Professor Michael E. Mann (@MichaelEMann) August 26, 2024
“The details of Mann's actions here remain shocking, especially in a country like the United States built on the foundation of freedom of expression. All the years, all the words, all the lawsuits… . . . There were several blog posts criticizing arguments that Mr. Mann proposed himself during routine political debates,” National Review editors wrote on Friday. “The science that Mann is supposed to be so passionate about is bound to involve disagreement. Yet Mann proves unable to deal with opposing views. Instead of engaging in debate, he uses libel and and sued us for causing emotional distress. Suffice it to say, this is not how discussions should be held in America.”
During discovery in the case, a 2012 email from Mann was revealed. In it, Mann said the lawsuit would “ruin” National Review, a publication he believed was a “threat to children” and subservient to “greedy fat cat corporations.” “I hope so.'' Masters. ”
National Review editors wrote that the $1 million they sought would still be less than what they spent defending themselves through Mann's ordeal. The judge's order only pays half that amount, but the editors said the money they receive from Mr. Mann “will at least be used in some way to keep us sane.”
Mann is one of the creators of the 1998 “hockey stick” climate model. This model combines various proxies for climate change into one model. Although this “hockey stick” is claimed to indicate that global temperatures have risen significantly in recent decades compared to previous centuries, Mann et al. has been attacked by critics and skeptics who claim the data was manipulated.
A 2021 court order effectively removed National Review from Mann's case, but Stein was ultimately found by a jury to have defamed Mann. Stein is currently being sued for $1 million in damages owed to Mann. Of note is Abraham Weiner, tenured professor of statistics and chair of the undergraduate statistics program at the Wharton School at the University of Pennsylvania. testified During Stein's trial, Mann was found to have engaged in “improper manipulation” of data that made his signature model “misleading.”
All content produced by the Daily Caller News Foundation, an independent, nonpartisan news distribution service, is available free of charge to legitimate news publishers with large audiences. All republished articles must include our logo, reporter byline, and DCNF affiliation. If you have any questions about our guidelines or our partnership, please contact us at licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.
