Linking to Jonathan Adler’s latest update on the Michael Mann defamation lawsuit against National Review. For those who haven’t followed this case, the partisan and outspoken climate scientist, Mann, took offense to comments made last year by NR’s Mark Steyn, who called Mann’s climate work “fraudulent” and called into the question his professional integrity, mocking Mann’s oft-repeated false claims in holding himself out as a Nobel Peace Prize recipient. Mann sued the conservative organizations NR and the Competitive Enterprise Institute for alleged defamatory statements made against him.
Although Mann’s climate theories and science may ultimately turn out to be correct, he’s about as good for the advancement of objective science as a large scary arachnid to a little girls’ tea party. Zealous advocacy, political partisanship, and thin skin, earning him the dubious title of “Climate Charlatan” by some, have made him an easy – and, yes, enjoyable – target for climate skeptics and opposing partisans.
In any event, a few weeks ago, NR’s and CEI’s request to have the lawsuit dismissed was rejected by a DC Superior Court judge. Adler, over at The Volokh Conspiracy Blog, provides interesting perspective on this case, as it potentially heads to trial. NR and CEI are being represented by their respective lead counsel, Shannen Coffin and David Rivkin.