Comments on: Mike Mann Files Lawsuit against Defamatory Denialist National Review, CEI

By: Torri

Torri — Fri, 16 Nov 2012 01:03:03 +0000

Which makes him nothing mroe than a village idiot gravelling at the feet
of America’s enemies. He approached them through what he liked to call “preventive diplomacy” and while doing so sought to establish more independence and effectiveness in the post of Secretary-General itself. s definition to include climate activism, human rights, and micro-financing.

By: Peter the Proud Sceptic

Peter the Proud Sceptic — Tue, 06 Nov 2012 00:53:56 +0000

‘…he was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize for having “created an ever-broader informed consensus about the connection between human activities and global warming.”

So let me get this straight. The Nobel Prize Committee awards him with the Peace Prize for his contribution to the spreading of, and promotion of, a particular interpretation of data that shows a possible correlation between ‘human activities’ (driving cars? turning on the heater?) and a perceived rise in the mean temperature readings of various weather stations across the globe. Even if (and it’s quite a big IF) he in fact accomplished such, why does it merit the PEACE Prize?! Was he selected because of his contribution to enforcing conformity (i.e. ‘consensus’) and thus forcing a kind of ‘peace’ upon the various quarreling factions within the scientific community who perhaps may have doubts about this whole fiasco?

By: Neilio

Neilio — Fri, 26 Oct 2012 02:51:35 +0000

Not a hoax eh? Where is the global warming then? Dr. Mann enjoys neither vindication, nor validation. Global temperatures have remained flat for sixteen years. His hocky stick chart has been resoundly refuted, and utterly disproven.
As far as this article seeming to support his arguments, take a good look at it again and you might pick up on the fact that it isn’t an article. It is a blog post with the majority of the post being from Dr. Mann’s facebook page. If you missed an important fact like that, it does not surprise me that you are a believer of AGW. People who belive in AGW often miss important facts. What exactly do you SCRUTINIZE? You obviously failed to scrutinize this post. Maybe you should call yourself skimmer?

By: SCRUTINIZER

SCRUTINIZER — Thu, 25 Oct 2012 23:00:16 +0000

This article seems to support the arguments of climate change scientists like Mann, who’s work was validated by a number of reputable scientific bodies. The picture you have created here is a grossly derisive and seeing it, before even reading this article, betrayed your obvious bias. I guess if your arguments won’t stand up to scrutiny, then you can just make fun of those with whom you disagree ~ sigh. Comparing Mann to a child molester shows the same weakness of character, creativity, and knowledge. These allegations and the way in which they were voiced were truly despicable, but we live in a country with freedom of speech and it is likely that Mann will not win his lawsuit, but he already has vindication and that is most important. Climate change is not a hoax and the work of scientists like Dr. Mann is and will remain extremely important…

By: NEILIO

NEILIO — Thu, 25 Oct 2012 11:45:04 +0000

This will be interesting to watch. Mann is out of his mind if he thinks he has a chance to win this. I predict that he will withdraw within the first week of the hearings. We’ll see.