Towards the end of Carvin’s mostly cringeworthy rebuttal, he seemed to score on EPA’s rejection of complaints against Mann’s own defamatory accusations of “scientific fraud”. EPA had found that Mann’s use of the term “fraud” meant no more than he believed the articles to be “scientifically flawed” and that, in such circumstances, Mann’s language was […]
About eight weeks ago, Jean S postulated that Gavin Schmidt had been involved in writing the documents supporting EPA’s decision denying various petitions for reconsideration of the Endangerment Finding (the “RTP documents“), documents that Mann had cited to the D.C. Court as a supposedly “independent” investigation into allegations against him. Obviously, if Schmidt had been involved […]
The Mann Statement of Claim prominently displayed, as one of only two quotations from the “inquiries”, an extended quotation from the Myths vs Facts webpage, included as one of three Resources accompanying the EPA decision denying reconsideration of various petitions for reconsideration of the Endangerment Finding (though Mann’s Statement of Claim falsely cited the gazetted […]
Jean S writes (transferred from a comment with the addition of a few headings): A question for the experts: is it known who wrote and who were used as experts in the EPA documents? If not, is that information considered public (i.e., obtainable under FOIA or similar)? The reason I ask is that I get […]
In a recent post, I observed that Mann’s Statement of Claim contained a bizarre misrepresentation about the nature of Mann’s research, as it falsely credited Mann with being “one of the first” to document the increase in 20th century temperatures. Reader PhilH, a retired judge, observed that, on its own, the misrepresentation was merely odd and that […]
One of the essential elements in Mann’s reliance on EPA findings is his assertion that his supposed exoneration by EPA had been “widely available and commented” on in the media and had been “read by the Defendants”: All of the above reports and publications were widely available and commented upon in the national and international […]
Michael Mann, now feigning sensitivity towards Mark Steyn’s use of the word “fraudulent”, used identical language in the Climategate emails against critics without the slightest compunction. Mann’s hypocrisy has been widely noted. Unpublicized thus far is a discussion by EPA, in which EPA concluded that Mann’s accusations of “scientific fraud” were within the scope of […]
In today’s post, I’ll discuss another misrepresentation in Mann’s Statement of Claim, one in which Mann bizarrely misrepresented the nature of his own research, falsely claiming credit for being “one of the first” to “document” the increase in 20th century temperatures. This particular false claim was in the same paragraph as Mann’s false claim to […]
In today’s post, I will return to my series on false claims in Mann’s lawsuit about supposed “exonerations”. ( For previous articles, see here). One of the most important misconduct allegations against Mann – the “amputation” of the Briffa reconstruction in IPCC TAR – was discussed recently by Judy Curry, who, in turn, covered Congressional testimony […]
In a recent post, Keith Kloor worried about what would happen when a “bad paper spotlighted on a popular climate blog” is not debunked. In fact, even when a “bad paper spotlighted on a popular climate blog” is debunked, that doesn’t prevent subsequent reliance in policy discussions, as we see in EPA citation of the […]
Climate Audit 