Global warming scientist loses lawsuit against 79-year-old Canadian climatologist Dr. Tim Ball

Graham Charles Lear
5 min readAug 27, 2019

Back in 2009, “Climategate” was a massive scandal with leaked documents revealing the climate change scam to be what it is.

Climate Change the Greatest Scientific Scandal of a Generation

Dr. Michael Mann, the scientist that co-authored a famous graph of temperature trends known as the “hockey stick graph” was implicated in the 2009 global warming email scandal The Climatic Research Unit email controversy (also known as “Climategate. began in November 2009 with the hacking of a server at the Climatic Research Unit (CRU) at the University of East Anglia (UEA) by an external attacker, copying thousands of emails and computer files, the Climatic Research Unit documents, to various internet locations several weeks before the Copenhagen Summit on climate change. All the Emails were between climate scientists talking between themselves. Many of the emails proved that Global warming as it was known back then proved that Global warming was a money-making scam.

Here are a few of those Emails

From: Phil Jones. To: Many. Nov 16, 1999
“I’ve just completed Mike’s Nature [the science journal] trick of adding in the real temps to each series for the last 20 years (ie, from 1981 onwards) and from 1961 for Keith’s to hide the decline.”

Critics cite this as evidence that data was manipulated to mask the fact that global temperatures are falling. Prof Jones claims the meaning of “trick” has been misinterpreted.

From Phil Jones To: Michael Mann (Pennsylvania State University). July 8, 2004
“I can’t see either of these papers being in the next IPCC report. Kevin and I will keep them out somehow — even if we have to redefine what the peer-review literature is!”

The IPCC is the UN body charged with monitoring climate change. The scientists did not want it to consider studies that challenge the view that global warming is genuine and man-made.

From: Kevin Trenberth (US National Center for Atmospheric Research). To: Michael Mann. Oct 12, 2009
“The fact is that we can’t account for the lack of warming at the moment and it is a travesty that we can’t… Our observing system is inadequate”

Prof Trenberth appears to accept a key argument of global warming sceptics — that there is no evidence temperatures have increased over the past 10 years.

Hockey Stick Broken! “Scientist” Michael Mann Loses in Court, Forced to Pay Court Costs — Global Warming Hoax Hit Hardest.

Below Mann’s graph is Ball’s, which uses much more reliable and easily attainable public data, which accurately shows a significantly warmer Medieval Warm Period with temperatures that are drastically hotter than the modern day’s.

Last week the court case against Dr. Tim Ball was decided by the Supreme Court of British Columbia, with Mann's case thrown out, and him ordered to pay the defendant’s legal costs, no doubt a tidy sum of money.

This is a blow to junk scientists everywhere!

As reported by American ThinkerTechnology News destroyed Michael Mann with their report on the case. Mann’s imminent defeat is set to send shock waves worldwide within the climate science community as the outcome will be both a legal and scientific vindication of U.S. President Donald Trump’s claims that climate scare stories are a “hoax.” (snip)

Michael Mann, who chose to file what many consider to be a cynical SLAPP (Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation) libel suit in the British Columbia Supreme Court, Vancouver six long years ago, has astonished legal experts by refusing to comply with the court direction to hand over all his disputed graph’s data. Mann’s iconic hockey stick has been relied upon by the UN’s IPCC and western governments as crucial evidence for the science of ‘man-made global warming.’

Mann is a central and controversial figure in climate change research. Mann’s so-called “hockey stick” graph depicting temperature changes over a 1000 year period was used as evidence in the United Nations’ Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) 2001 report to conclude carbon dioxide from industrial activity is causing global warming. Mimicking the shape of a hockey stick, the graph showed a long period of stable temperatures (the shaft) followed by a rapid rise in temperatures (the blade) during the last hundred years.

Behind all this nonsense is the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) who today came out again with the tired old story of sea level rises.

They again said

The global sea level has been gradually rising over the past century and several areas could disappear from the map as a result.

They actually said all this twenty years ago

Then on 16/05/15, they told us the dire news that a new study finds that in "Sea level rising faster in the past 20 years than in the entire 20th century”

Why because climate scientists are using satellite measurements instead of tidal gauges.

Firstly, hundreds of tide gauges show sea level rising at about a third of the rate than satellites do. Worse, the original satellite raw data showed the same slow rise, until it was suddenly adjusted. The real scandal is that the rapidly rising trend was largely created by adjustments in the first place. These latest corrections just adjust down part of the rate which had been created by adjusting up. On top of all that, the long paleo-history of sea levels done by people like Nils-Axel Mörner show that the current rise is not unusual or unprecedented at all. Could it get more pointless? It can: the acceleration Watson et al found is so small it’s less than the errors.

The conclusion of the paper is that instead of the sea levels rising at 3.2mm/yr as per the official satellite data, they are rising at 2.3mm/yr + 0.043mm/yr2 of acceleration. Over a century that means the projected sea-level rise is revised downwards from 320mm to 251mm. That means sea level rise on current trends has dropped off the bottom end of any UNIPCC projection for sea-level rise (AR5 WG1 SPM) for the period 2081–2100, as against 1985–2005. The likely range is between 260 and 820mm under all scenarios. The projection (mid-point 400mm) range is based on succeeding in cutting global emissions to near zero before 2100.

Tide gauges don’t agree with the satellites on sea level. The 68 most stable NOAA tide gauges around the world show about 1mm a year rise. Beenstock use a thousand tide gauges around the world and found the same rise of about 1mm/year. Nils-Axel Mörner has studied arrays of gauges as well but also used the opposite approach and found practically the single most stable beach in Northern Europe. He analyzed long records on all the beaches around it to figure out which way the whole area was tilting — again he found the change of the most stable point is about 1mm/year.

The conclusion is that no one should trust anyone who works for the IPCC

Todays younger generation like Greta Thunberg forgets that people a lot older have seen all of what she is doing before. They forget we have a wealth of knowledge to discredit what they are saying and are protesting about. As the saying goes

Been there done it, we have the T-shirt to prove it

--

--

Graham Charles Lear

What is life without a little controversy in it? Quite boring and sterile would be my answer.