The economics and truth of this post are simple. When science wins then our economy, government and truth wins - When anti-science wins then our economy, government and truth fails.
This one major
The climate scientist Michael Mann on Thursday won his defamation lawsuit against Rand Simberg, a former adjunct scholar at the Competitive Enterprise Institute, and Mark Steyn, a contributor to National Review.
The six-member jury announced its unanimous verdict after a four-week trial in District of Columbia Superior Court and one full day of deliberation. They found both Mr. Simberg and Mr. Steyn guilty of defaming Dr. Mann with multiple false statements and awarded the scientist $1 in compensatory damages from each writer.
The jury also found the writers had made their statements with “maliciousness, spite, ill will, vengeance or deliberate intent to harm,” and levied punitive damages of $1,000 against Mr. Simberg and $1 million against Mr. Steyn in order to deter others from doing the same.
“This is a victory for science and it’s a victory for scientists,” Dr. Mann said.
​
People who imply the courts have just outlawed dissing scientists implying that the scientists are right and any other perspectives can only be wrong are engaging in global warming catastrophizing gaslighting. Because, as usual, The Truth is never sufficiently self-serving. Ya gotta juice up to “guide and enhance” how and what people think.
The courts just said you can’t wrongly attack people. No news there. They didn’t say Climate Change is now The Law and therefor true.
It was a win for science because political hacks defamed a scientist.
Dr. Mann’s attorneys have indicated that they will appeal an earlier decision about Competitive Enterprise Institute and National Review! “They’re next"
Faulty reasoning. The law does not define which profession may or may not be defamed. Science was not on trial, neither plaintiff nor defendant at the trial. The plaintiff was citizen Dr. Mann, his profession had no bearing on the trial.
Update time. Mann has gotten into deep financial doo-doo, almost half-a-million dollars worth.
After winning his defamation case against bloggers Rand Simberg and Mark Steyn last year, Mann — Penn’s vice provost for climate science, policy, and action — has been ordered to pay attorneys’ fees totaling $477,350.80 based on the dismissal of three of his claims in 2019. The defendants filed the motion for fees under D.C.’s Anti-SLAPP Act, which is intended to protect those exercising free speech from frivolous defamation lawsuits.
In a separate case against The National Review, Mann is on the hook for over $530K. “Irving’s decision followed a January ruling that ordered Mann to pay $530,000 to the National Review based on the same statute.”