Climate and Weather

espola said:
McIntyre is a retired businessman whose career was spent in mineral and energy exploration. In his retirement, he founded the climate-denial website Climate Audit. CA for years hid its funding sources until it was disclosed that McIntyre was receiving regular payments from a Canadian energy development corporation. His role in this issue was providing funding for Dr. McKitrick who eventually came up with some alternative results from those of Dr. Mann based on similar data sources, published not in a scientific journal but by the Competitive Enterprise Institute.

McI and McK questioned Mann's results, but never his character. Ball lied about Mann and by inference Penn State, and thus the lawsuit.
Click to expand...
All this over R-squared eh? Imagine that.
 
Ricky Fandango said:
I get it.
You're all in on the hockey stick.
Too bad Mann isn't, or else he would have shown his work.
Embarrassing for you and him.
Entertaining though it is to watch your tenacious defense of your climate god.

Embarrassing for Penn State too.
Are they on the hook to pay the legal expenses of Dr. Ball?
Click to expand...

I don't think Dr. Mann is embarrassed by the fact that his work has been reviewed and approved by people who know what they are talking about, and/or reinforced by others who have made similar studies.

I'm not embarrassed about arguing with idiots and suckers on the Internet.

I think Penn State got what they wanted - public notice that they will sue people who slander them.
 
espola said:
I don't think Dr. Mann is embarrassed by the fact that his work has been reviewed and approved by people who know what they are talking about, and/or reinforced by others who have made similar studies.

I'm not embarrassed about arguing with idiots and suckers on the Internet.

I think Penn State got what they wanted - public notice that they will sue people who slander them.
Click to expand...
Who got slandered?
The judge dismissed the case with prejudice.

Tenacious piety.
 
Ricky Fandango said:
I dont pretend to speak for Dr. Mann or his hockey stick.
(dont want to get sued. lol)
Click to expand...

Dr. Mann's position has been backed up by almost all the people who have proper credentials to judge it.

I always enjoy pointing out your errors and gullibility. It's like science camp, but year-round. Don't quit me.
 
espola said:
It seems to me that you have no idea what that means.
Click to expand...
Can you explain to me why Dr. Mann, having 8 years to show his own data that would have ( if correct) won his case, failed to do so?
Can you do that, because Dr. Mann just cost Penn State a shitload of money.

(because he could, (or would) not.)
 
Ricky Fandango said:
Can you explain to me why Dr. Mann, having 8 years to show his own data that would have ( if correct) won his case, failed to do so?
Can you do that, because Dr. Mann just cost Penn State a shitload of money.

(because he could, (or would) not.)
Click to expand...

Ball's lawyer attempted to hide his case in a paper blizzard and succeeded. Not only that, Ball "won" because gullible suckers believe it when they are told it has some bearing on the scientific findings behind the "hockey-stick" graph. Asking for the r-squared data at this point is like me asking you to show where you learned the alphabet and to prove that all your words are spelled correctly.

As for Penn State, a reasonable decision could have been based on comparing the cost to comply against the cost not to comply. If Barr wants to recoup his legal costs, he will have to file a motion with the judge or launch a separate lawsuit, which will put him in the position of being the party who has to show all his documents.
 
espola said:
Ball's lawyer attempted to hide his case in a paper blizzard and succeeded. Not only that, Ball "won" because gullible suckers believe it when they are told it has some bearing on the scientific findings behind the "hockey-stick" graph. Asking for the r-squared data at this point is like me asking you to show where you learned the alphabet and to prove that all your words are spelled correctly.

As for Penn State, a reasonable decision could have been based on comparing the cost to comply against the cost not to comply. If Barr wants to recoup his legal costs, he will have to file a motion with the judge or launch a separate lawsuit, which will put him in the position of being the party who has to show all his documents.
Click to expand...
This is not an answer.
I see excuses and diversions.

Are you calling the judge an idiot too?
 
espola said:
Is this an Izzy act? You know where you say something false and then refer back to it as if it were golden truth?
Click to expand...
That was a Cheney trick, plant a reference in a newspaper article then refer back to it as a source, as if no one will notice (nutters don't of course). nutterism has been around awhile.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top