By John O’Sullivan
Junk scientist left with nowhere to hide secret faked ‘hockey stick’ graph computer code after hard-hitting recent article. On his Facebook page Mann yesterday posted his lawyer, Roger McConchie’s, tame rebuttal to my recent article:
“The Mann lawsuit is currently in the discovery phase, with further examinations for discovery (depositions) of the defendants to be scheduled shortly, following which I will either set the action for trial by jury in the usual manner, or bring a summary trial application on behalf of Dr. Mann for damages and injunctive relief.”
Here’s why that’s pure attorney flim-flam. Mann will not dare go to trial because to do so would require he surrender as evidence his hidden metadata (more on that below). To let a jury see that statistical chicanery would prove Dr Ball correctly adduced that Mann
“belongs in the state pen, not Penn State!”
As such, egotistical Mann’s trumped up case is unwinnable. There is further delicious irony in Mann’s FB pronouncement as it includes Desmogblog links relying on fake claims against me by the disgraced former JAMA journalist, Andrew Skolnick; we now have ‘two peas in a pod.’ Skolnick filed fraudulent affidavits earlier in this case – inter alia perjuring himself by claiming to have been nominated by the Pulitzer Prize Committee.
Mann, has already had to retract his own phony claims to be a Nobel Laureate further degrading his already tattered reputation. Laughably Mann still persists with the threadbare assertion that his hidden hockey stick numbers have some monetary value worth protecting. You do jest sir! In his papers (filed on September 2, 2011) Mann claims his still hidden numbers are ‘proprietary materials’ and refuses to disclose them. Are these undisclosed ‘materials’ really worth more than $10 million? $20 million? That’s a low ball number of what Mann (or his backers ) are going to have to pay out in legal fees and compensation for their SLAPP suit failures.
So, the ‘proprietary materials’ sham simply isn’t going to wash in the BC court. It is already a matter of public record that Mann’s hockey stick reconstruction method was made by lining up his proxy tree ring data with measured temperatures in the 20th century to calibrate the scale. In the process he used a statistic called the r-squared correlation coefficient. We also know, from evidence in the public domain, that Mann found that over most of the reconstruction there was essentially no match (ie the r2 data was telling Mann his graph was junk).
We know Mann did, indeed, perform this important due diligence test because he let on that he got r-squared results for the one part of the data where there was a weak match. We also see it in the code he eventually was forced to publish.
Mann thereafter lied when he proudly boasted to mainstream journalists that his graph had passed the tests. He got away with that hubris for a while because he very carefully didn’t publish most of the r-squared numbers themselves. These unpublished r2 numbers are what Tim Ball (and I) want to see examined in open court. The case boils down to a personal interest versus public interest question: are taxpaying voters entitled to see all the scientific evidence they helped fund so that they may knowledgably apply their free speech in the debate over so-called man-made climate change?
We say we can prove Mann’s method created scaremongering hockey stick graphs whatever numbers were fed in, and he (and his slick lawyer) knows it.
Despite Roger McConchie’s spin (above) his client still, after THREE YEARS in the discovery phase of this case, fails to disclose that key evidence. That’s why this case will never get to trial!
As former CIA contractor Kent Clizbe says, ” A whistleblower will finish off Mann, once and for all. He cannot be a pleasant person to work for or with. There is a colleague, grad student, lab monitor, or computer network guy who has access to Mann’s tightly held secrets.”
And what is my personal stake in all this? As already reported, I have a legally-binding agreement with Dr Ball to fully compensate him for my words and actions, in the unlikely event Mann wins. If Ball wins I don’t get a penny.
Like Mark Steyn, who has now also filed counterclaims as he defends another of Mann’s SLAPP suits, I won’t stand by while this crook tries to chill open debate on a key public policy issue: supposed “dangerous” man-made global warming. In fact, as anyone who can comprehend actual real world measurements knows, global temperatures have flat-lined for the last 17 years, while top Russian scientists say from 2014 we are entering a new ice age.
But actual measurements mean nothing to biased climate clowns; they prefer cherry-picked proxy data from one or two tree ring samples to help rig their computer models. And all the while Mann’s lawsuits are costing millions to keep these secret. Who has the deep pockets to keep paying Mikey’s fees? And who is funding me (if anyone)? “Follow the money” is an old adage best remembered. Read Dr Ball’s sensational new book, The Deliberate Corruption of Climate Science, and learn why Mann truly “belongs in the state pen, not Penn State!”
Breaking: Penn State University’s resident nut job is now libeling respected Aussie journalist Andrew Bolt via Twitter. Bolt has demanded an immediate retraction and apology or threatens to sue. When will someone take Mikey in hand? Read more at Herald Sun.