Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

applegrove

(118,677 posts)
Tue Sep 3, 2013, 11:50 PM Sep 2013

"Judge refuses to toss climate scientist Mann’s defamation lawsuit"

Judge refuses to toss climate scientist Mann’s defamation lawsuit

By Ben Geman at the Hill

http://thehill.com/blogs/e2-wire/e2-wire/319757-judge-again-refuses-to-toss-climate-scientist-manns-defamation-suit-against-national-review

"SNIP..............................


Judge Natalia M. Combs Greene of the Superior Court of the District of Columbia writes in Friday's ruling that, “The evidence before the court indicates the likelihood that ‘actual malice’ is present.”

The latest procedural ruling in the Pennsylvania State University scientist’s lawsuit is here. “The Court finds that there is sufficient evidence in the record to demonstrate that Plaintiff is likely to succeed on the merits,” the ruling states.

Mann sued the National Review and the Competitive Enterprise Institute (CEI), a conservative advocacy group, in 2012 over their blog posts that alleged his research is fraudulent.

CEI’s post also compared Mann to convicted child molester Jerry Sandusky, calling Mann “the Jerry Sandusky of climate science” by alleging he “molested and tortured data.”

.............................SNIP"
8 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
"Judge refuses to toss climate scientist Mann’s defamation lawsuit" (Original Post) applegrove Sep 2013 OP
GOOD MotherPetrie Sep 2013 #1
Excellent! "Likely to succeed on the merits" R&K nt longship Sep 2013 #2
Great! SunSeeker Sep 2013 #3
No kidding. That's the long and the short of it. calimary Sep 2013 #5
KnR Hekate Sep 2013 #4
K&R! Enthusiast Sep 2013 #6
Wow, Mark Steyn should be charged with lying to the court with what he said in his 'defense' ck4829 Sep 2013 #7
Yep, there need to be consequences for this kind of shit mindwalker_i Sep 2013 #8

SunSeeker

(51,559 posts)
3. Great!
Wed Sep 4, 2013, 01:35 AM
Sep 2013

There should be consequences for these sort of lies. They did not just defame a man, they are standing in the way of humanity being able to save itself.

calimary

(81,298 posts)
5. No kidding. That's the long and the short of it.
Wed Sep 4, 2013, 02:33 AM
Sep 2013

These bastards are standing in the way of humanity being able to save itself - and the planet. Just mainly for a few extra bucks.

ck4829

(35,077 posts)
7. Wow, Mark Steyn should be charged with lying to the court with what he said in his 'defense'
Wed Sep 4, 2013, 06:56 AM
Sep 2013

"I didn't defend the CEI with their Sandusky comparison."

Yeah, you did! It's right there!

mindwalker_i

(4,407 posts)
8. Yep, there need to be consequences for this kind of shit
Wed Sep 4, 2013, 10:57 AM
Sep 2013

Too bad O'Reily isn't accountable for "Tiller the baby killer."

Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Environment & Energy»"Judge refuses to to...