Climate scientist sues newspaper for 'poisoning' global warming debate

andrew-weaverLooks like the warmists are getting SLAPP happy (Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation).

Climate modeller Andrew Weaver launches libel action in Canada for publishing ‘grossly irresponsible falsehoods’

By David Adam

One of the world’s leading climate scientists has launched a libel lawsuit against a Canadian newspaper for publishing articles that he says “poison” the debate on global warming.

In a case with potentially huge consequences for online publishers, lawyers acting for Andrew Weaver, a climate modeller at the University of Victoria, Canada, have demanded the National Post removes the articles not only from its own websites, but also from the numerous blogs and sites where they were reposted.

Weaver says the articles, published at the height of several recent controversies over the reliability of climate science in recent months, contain “grossly irresponsible falsehoods”. He said he filed the suit after the newspaper refused to retract the articles.

Weaver said: “If I sit back and do nothing to clear my name, these libels will stay on the internet forever. They’ll poison the factual record, misleading people who are looking for reliable scientific information about global warming.”

The four articles, published from December to February, claimed that Weaver cherrypicked data to support his climate research, and that he tried to blame the “evil fossil fuel” industry for break-ins at his office in 2008 to divert attention from reported mistakes in the 2007 report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, on which he was lead author.

The lawsuit also highlights several claims in the articles that attempt to question or undermine the scientific consensus on climate change, including that annual global mean temperatures have stopped increasing in the last decade and that climate models are “falling apart”.

Such statements, the lawsuit says, would lead readers to conclude that Weaver “is so strongly motivated by a corrupt interest in receiving government funding that he willfully conceals scientific climate data which refutes global warming in order to keep alarming the public so that it welcomes… funding for climate scientists such as himself.”

Weaver said: “I asked the National Post to do the right thing, to retract a number of recent articles that attributed to me statements I never made, accused me of things I never did, and attacked me for views I never held. To my absolute astonishment, the newspaper refused.”

A spokesman for the National Post said: “Beyond saying that we intend to defend the article, we do not comment on such suits.”

Read the rest of this story at the London Guardian.

28 Responses to Climate scientist sues newspaper for 'poisoning' global warming debate

  1. paul wenum April 23, 2010 at 8:24 pm #

    You cannot retract a fact. He’s trying a CYA. Typical.

  2. cubanshamoo April 24, 2010 at 12:31 am #

    This is what I mean with my post on chicken little: if we do not react as they do, we are loosing ground. I was reading about the idea of making suits against many of these pseudoscientists, and Gore and NASA etc., but it seems they are the one who take action against us. And the reasons is simple: the better way to win a battle is fighting back, faster, and stronger. I see about 50 new books and 1000’s of arguments against the GW fraud, but it seem we don’t know any lawyer.

  3. Neil F. AGWD/BSD April 24, 2010 at 7:05 am #

    Here he is the biggest douchebag in the universe. -South Park
    This reminds me of the South Park episode where Stan calls famous psychic John Edwards a douchebag, and Edwards says “I am not a douchebag! You take that back or I’m going to sue you!!”
    Even better, the episode where Stan is beleived to be the reincarnation of L. Ron Hubbard. At the end, in a press conference, Stan tells the truth about Scientology, and the Scientologists tell Stan they are going to sue him.

    I am not familliar with Andrew Weaver. I’m sure I have seen the name before, probably is association with the IPCC, I really don’t recall. But this is ridiculous! Did you notice the links at the bottom of the story for twitter, and facebook, and RSS feed? They are standard on just about every story and website on the web, and this guy is saying the newspaper “expressly authorized republication” because of them? That’s a stretch, don’t you think.
    I’ll bet this does not make it to court. The newspaper will probably cave, and post a retraction. Good luck on retrieving every copy though. I hope it does go to court, and the newspapers stand their ground and defend the stories. In order for something to be libel, it has to actually be false.

    • Rob N. Hood April 27, 2010 at 7:09 am #

      You mean like when Bush took his case up to the Supreme Court (using the courst system like never before) to be awarded the whitehouse??

      Like that?

  4. cubanshamoo April 24, 2010 at 10:58 am #

    I hope you are right Neil and I really wish I am wrong, but they seem to act in chain (militant style). One after the other the suits are comming in order to “preserve their honorability” (mean celebrity status). And they can count with the money of the IPCC to pay the lawyers, because IPCC depend on them to survive.

  5. Neil F. AGWD/BSD April 24, 2010 at 3:21 pm #

    Climategate is just a wound, not a death blow. I’m pretty sure I said this is not the time to quit, and that turns out to be right. I am not suprised by this development as the courts seem to always be the default fallback position. But like I said if this goes to trial, they have to prove that the stories are false AND the intent of the authors was to lie. I just don’t think they have a case there. And no Rob I am not an expert on the law, but I have heard of decisions from other cases that hinged upon that very question. But I don’t believe they can prove the stories are even false, so………

  6. paul wenum April 24, 2010 at 11:59 pm #

    Neil, I agree. It is only the first win, or should I say stand-off. Similiar to the “Play-offs.” “Last man standing” with a factual argument will prevail. Hopefully Americans sit up and listen. For that, I unfortunately doubt. Let’s see if they have the fortitude. Let’s pray they do. The “death blow” will be the enactment of Cap N Trade which will put American under economically if not stopped. I always though Lieberman had a brain. I now know I was mislead. Thought he was for the betterment of the economy. Boy, was I wrong. By the way, this suit pending will go nowhere. The newspaper busines financially is getting hammered. It will settle or drop and you will not see a peep thereafter. Trust me.

  7. cubanshamoo April 25, 2010 at 1:39 am #

    Hope you two are right. I have no clue how these suits may evolve.

  8. Hal Groar April 25, 2010 at 11:52 am #

    I am not surprised at this. A libel suit is one thing, a lawsuit addressing the facts on AGW will not be allowed to go through. I think the proponents of the theory would rather have us believe based on faith, not facts. They would never want to have to prove it in court. I hope the EPA tries to push a co2 ban, then the rubber meets the road. I know there are many states preparing for that lawsuit. Fun to watch!!

  9. Rob N. Hood April 25, 2010 at 3:05 pm #

    Nope Hal, they won’t and they didn’t (EPA/co2 ban). See my re: post the newest story above, or watch the news…

    The fat lady has already started singing and the crazy enviros you think are talking over the planet have lost again. Big surprise.

  10. Chase Peterson April 25, 2010 at 10:14 pm #

    The effects of Global Warming is getting much stronger these days. We should concentrate more on alternative energy to reduce carbon emissions.

    • Neil F. AGWD/BSD April 27, 2010 at 5:46 am #

      Ok, since you say it is, it must be true! Oh, and did you know that it’s not carbon that is alledgedly causing AGW? Carbon in the atmosphere is a fine particulate that acts as an aerosol that reflects solar radiation and would cause cooling. Carbon dioxide, which is an oderless, colorless trace gas, composed of a carbon atom attatched to two oxygen atoms, is what is said to produce a greenhouse effect. I don’t know what level of intelligence you posess, but your statement is moronic.

  11. Cubanshamoo April 26, 2010 at 5:20 am #

    Another one who forgot the long winter. Darling, start the Hummer an hour before we leave, our roses at the garden are dying by the excess of oxigen!!!!!

  12. paul wenum April 26, 2010 at 8:50 pm #

    Chase, Give us factual examples for what you speak. We are impatiently awaiting your factual response.

  13. paul wenum May 3, 2010 at 9:22 pm #

    Must have chased our friend “Chase” away. No answer. Typical. Must have read off script.

  14. Rob N. Hood May 4, 2010 at 7:36 am #

    Just like me huh Paul? Chased me away too? Typical?

    Only in Paul’s World.

  15. Rob N. Hood May 4, 2010 at 3:16 pm #

    What you’ve managed with cronies Cheney, Rove, W., Limbaugh, Palin, and Beck is exemplary, using the sleaziest, decidedly inept political lying in decades to create mayhem. Bad lying is critical, especially when denying overt reality, whether climate change or corporate hegemony, WMDs or 9/11 links with Saddam. Don’t gullible earthlings realize the issue isn’t whether the global oven threatens a closed planetary system but when they pass the tipping point of utter disaster? We inherited paradise to transform it from something green to fiery black in 150 years? Talk about ingratitude.

    The Satanic Master Plan (SMP) aims to make God’s scruffy creatures abandon all hope, not only in human governance, but law, justice, war, religion, science, and rational thinking in general. Thus, an array of simultaneous upheavals – shocking, church-shielded pedophilia, government assassination of its own citizens (even a Prez), faux death panels, unrestrained banking abuses, unmonitored oil drilling – all capped off by the enduring Great Recession. Oh, what a time for devils and doom merchants.

    Satan hasn’t directly hoodwinked earthlings since conning those five Supreme Court rubes to put the great Boob in the White House, generously spreading his every misjudgment and misstatement. Who but Satan could have imagined, then extended the great Florida election fiasco, compounded by letting a real loser, with one half million fewer votes, take over. Frankly, even we worried Our Leader was over-reaching, but as usual kudos went all around: W. ravaged everything he touched, roiling the planet like a deranged rooster on a drunken rampage- with a little help from his friends.

  16. paul wenum May 4, 2010 at 7:07 pm #

    Again, you live in the past and we never seem to hear a solution. You are still in denial from 2000.

  17. Rob N. Hood May 5, 2010 at 7:01 am #

    It’s not denial, it’s shame and disbelief that something like that could happen in America. The America I knew doesn’t exist anymore, like I’ve said before, maybe it never really did. But especially not since the late 60’s. But 2000 was a HUGE blow to democracy (the last nail in JFK’s coffin I guess). Yeah, Neil, I know, you say we aren’t supposed to have democracy anyway. Well, to that I say you’re crazy, and I don’t care what kind of legalized mumbo jumbo you can post- you are wrong about that.

    But please- feel free to try. I do have an open mind, unlike many people who just claim they do. I’d like to know how me and millions of other Americans ever believed we had/have a democracy if in fact we never did. I’m all ears (eyes actually). This is an interesting subject and Dan please don’t condescend and patronize me for this. It is a real factor, apparently especially for the far Right, that I think it needs to be discussed further. Is it just semantics is that it?? I really want to know.

  18. paul wenum May 5, 2010 at 9:40 pm #

    There is a difference between reality and denial. As to an open mind. We all have one. Let’s all start using them to their full capacity by listening and understanding where both parties are coming from and why without being chastised for every comment made for which you may differ. Called “talking” which is rare to find today. Enough said.

  19. Cubanshamoo May 6, 2010 at 2:37 am #

    I started to miss Bush

  20. paul wenum May 7, 2010 at 11:36 pm #

    There’s a big sign just out of Wyoming, Minnesota that has been an TV, drudge, etc. with a picture of GW. “Do you Miss me yet?” See it every weekend coming from my cabin. You would be surprised how many cars slow down and honk.

  21. cubanshamoo May 15, 2010 at 9:15 am #

    Oh yeah, I saw several signs with the “Miss me yet?” at the Internet. I could not imagine these add in Europe. Here politicians are so “long faced”, stupids, without humor, politically correct.

  22. Rob N. Hood May 16, 2010 at 4:14 pm #

    Missing Bush is like missing an extra hole in your head. You guys for real? He’s everything you claim you are against… explain that for me, ok??

  23. Rob N. Hood May 16, 2010 at 4:22 pm #

    Ok, ALMOST everything. He loved dropping bombs on people’s heads, and you guys don’t hate war either. There may be one or two other things you all have in common with the cognitively-impaired Mr. Bush, but there are many things you say you are against that he was FOR, e.g. Big Government, Deficits, attacks on individual rights/privacy, Habeous Corpus, Posse Comitatus… etc. etc.

  24. Rob N. Hood May 16, 2010 at 4:24 pm #

    The last two things he was AGAINST, and made dictator-like decisions about… but you get my drift. Oh, and that’s another thing- you pretend you don’t like dictators… but you do when they are CONSERVATIVE…

  25. paul wenum May 18, 2010 at 9:48 pm #

    OK, it took you three times to think about the past. Get on with life. Bush is not President!!!!


  1. Global Climate Scam » Climate scientist sues newspaper for … | the world - April 24, 2010

    […] the rest here: Global Climate Scam » Climate scientist sues newspaper for … Tags: debate, Global Warming, huge-consequences, leading-climate, libel-lawsuit, […]

A project of Minnesota Majority, hosted and maintained by Minnesotans for Global Warming.