“It took the jury very little time to decide that Michael Mann had been defamed by conservative writers who likened him to a pedophile,” said Bishop Barclay, a longtime Slashdot reader. I'm writing this as a follow-up to Wednesday's article. “He was awarded a $1 million judgment against the writers, presumably because a review of his data showed no wrongdoing or misuse of the data, but despite this, 'Conservative ' Writers' accusations continued.'' The Associated Press reports: Mann's research came under scrutiny after emails from Mann and other scientists were leaked in 2009, leading to further scrutiny of the “hockey stick” graph, and skeptics said Mann He claimed that the data had been manipulated. Although investigations by Penn State University and others found no misuse of data by Mann, his work continued to come under attack, especially from conservatives. “Mann could be called the Jerry Sandusky of climate science, except instead of sexually abusing children, he sexually abused and tortured data,” Shinberg wrote. Ta. Another author, Mark Stein, later referenced Simberg's paper in his own article published in National Review, calling his Mann study “fraudulent.”
A jury in the District of Columbia Superior Court awarded Mann $1 in damages from each writer. He also ordered punitive damages against Simberg in the amount of $1,000 and against Steyn in the amount of $1 million. The verdict was announced after a four-week trial and one day of deliberation. Stein was represented during the trial, but through her manager Melissa Howes said she intended to appeal the $1 million punitive damages claim, saying it would require “due process scrutiny.” .