Climate Change on Trial

The bad news keeps coming for Professor Michael Mann. The Judge has declared that he and his lawyers presented false data to the court - ironically in a case where he was denying using false data. Mann has also had his million dollar punitive damages award slashed. This story will run and run. We bring you a special update episode.

The verdict is in, and it’s a shocker. We break down the jury’s shocking decision to:

Find Mark Steyn and Rand Simberg liable for defamation  

Decide the defendants knew their statements were false 

Punish Mark more than Rand for mostly repeating Rand’s words with some context

We have an exclusive comment from Mark Steyn on how he feels, and his next steps. The fight is not over. And, we ask if Free Speech still exists in liberal American cities. Or are there protected people and ideas that are just Too...

And now the end is near…..

Listen to each party give their closing statement in the Free Speech trial of the century. Is Mann’s lawyer’s casual, disjointed summary some kind of jury mind game? Will Victoria Weatherford’s clear, organized, and factual arguments convince them? And will Mark Steyn’s oratory work against the mostly poker-faced jury? I think we recorded several laughs at his jokes. Is the jury warming to the undocumented Free Speech warrior? You’ll get to decide for yourself about Mark’s speech because we’re giving you the whole thing, unredacted and r...

You’ve heard of Climategate, but now we bring you: Stalkergate.

It was a day of high drama, both inside and outside the courthouse. 

This trial of the century is rapidly coming to its close. In today’s episode, you’ll hear from five separate witnesses for Mark Steyn and Rand Simberg. There is a theme running through all the testimony: Witness after witness spoke about how Mann was the driver of the bullying and vindictive tone of the climate debate both before and after the Climategate scandal. 

We also got to hear some of...

As this case progressed, we believed Michael Mann’s case was getting weaker and weaker. But we never thought the judge would agree.

It’s a devastating development for Michael Mann and his lawyers. Hear Judge Irving describe their case as “disjointed,” and wondered aloud just what the purpose of two of their witnesses was.

It kept getting worse for Mann. Listen to Dr. Judith Curry describe how his private and public smearing of her reputation devastated her professional life. We’ll also hear convincing evidence that the Penn State investigation into Mann’s scientific misconduct w...

Is the free speech trial of the century about to collapse? Did Michael Mann's lawyers deliberately show an error-filled document to the jury? High drama in the DC Superior Court as the defendants push for the dismissal of all charges because of the plaintiff's misconduct. Even the judge seemed appalled.

Speaking of dodgy figures, listen as an expert statistician explains how Mann manipulated data to produce the hockey stick graph.

And, hear a witness condemn “jet-setting climate celebrities who are calling me a denier”. Who could she be referring to?

And we tackle the...

Has Michael Mann’s case collapsed? Is the trial over before the defendants even present a  witness? It was a drama-filled day in court as Mark Steyn and his co-defendant’s lawyers urged the judge to dismiss the case. They claimed, and the judge appeared to agree, that Mann and his lawyers had failed to submit the allegedly defamatory articles to the jury. Was the case about to collapse on a technicality?

The judge also heard that Mann had failed to prove that the articles were damaging to his reputation, or even that he had suffered any injur...

Michael Mann’s legal team yet again tries to admit a controversial report into evidence. The document has been a source of controversy since it was first examined by the appeals court, and has been a subject of furious litigation throughout the trial. The judge finally makes a ruling on the report, but the big question remains: Why don’t Mann’s lawyers like the DC metro system?

And, can Mann’s case survive the laughter of Berkeley students?

Welcome to episode nine of Climate Change on Trial.

Don’t just take our word for i...

Michael Mann spends all day in the witness box facing tough questions from Mark Steyn and Rand Simberg‘s lawyer.  Does he have all the answers?

Hear his defense for falsely and frequently claiming to have won a Nobel Prize. Will the jury be convinced by his rather convoluted explanation for this scientific stolen valor?

And does  Michael Mann really have a strong case for defamation? He himself frequently spreads false and malicious rumors about colleagues who challenged his science. Listen to his explanation for falsely accusing a female scientist and former colleague of “sleeping her wa...

Welcome to a special bonus episode of Climate Change on Trial.

Mark Steyn‘s opening statement was our most popular episode by far. However we felt bad only giving you excerpts in episode three, so now we present you Mark Steyn’s full uncensored, unredacted opening statement. It is a joy to listen to and a speech for the ages. It’s a brilliant oratory and a brilliant summary of the case, the issues, and just what is at stake if Professor Michael Mann wins.

Welcome to the best defense you’ll ever hear of Free Spe...

Finally, the day Mark Steyn has been waiting for, for 12 years has arrived. Michael Mann is in the witness box and must answer questions from the person he has tried to destroy for over a decade. 

Now you will get to hear the true story of the Climategate leaks, the hockey stick graph, world temperature records, and mean stares at supermarkets. (It happened in aisle nine, by the way).

On today’s episode, you’ll hear how Mann’s email accusing a fellow scientist of sleeping her way to a PhD actually proves he’s a Me Too...

Professor Michael Mann continues to give evidence in his defamation case against writer Mark Steyn and scientist Rand Simberg. The soft questions from Mann’s lawyer ended today. Listen as he comes under relentless, but rather charming questioning from Rand Simberg‘s defense.

Mann is adamant that Simberg and Steyn’s statements were false. He says there was no fraud or misconduct in the creation of his Hockey Stick graph, and he refuted allegations that Penn State covered up his alleged scientific malfeasance.

Listen as Professor Mann claims he suffered financial damage, and was treated like a...

Finally, after 12 years of litigation and delay, Professor Michael Mann goes into the witness box.

Is he entitled to millions of dollars in damages for two short articles written over a decade ago?

In a packed episode, you’ll also hear writer and broadcaster, Mark Steyn, in combative form, pushing back against Michael Mann's lawyer. You’ll hear Steyn explain why he believes Mann benefited from a corrupt Penn State “phony investigation“. And you’ll hear questions about Mark Steyn’s educational qualifications, and if he really is “Doctor Dropout.”

Then Michael Mann gets to present...

Finally after 12 years of litigation and delays, defendant Mark Steyn takes the stand in the most important free speech trial in over half a century. Steyn is being sued by climate scientist and activist Michael Mann for criticizing his hockey stick graph and the investigation into Mann’s alleged scientific malfeasance.

Now Mann has a chance to question Steyn. But has he chosen the wrong opponent? Hear Michael Mann’s explanation of why he falsely claimed to have won a Nobel prize. And hear Mark Steyn’s response. Listen to the incredible details about Michael Mann's previous lawsui...

The trial really got underway today with three gripping opening statements. The defendants’ words  “broke the bounds of decency,'' according to Michael Mann’s lawyer. His combative opening set the tone for what became a very, very combative courtroom as the day went on. And you can hear all the drama here.

The jury heard the accusations against Michael Mann were “vile.” But both defendants got to hit back. Their opening speeches slammed Mann’s Climate Change Hockey Stick graph and the “whitewash” investigations into his scientific method.

Rand Simberg’s lawyer said Mann is guilty of bullyi...

Michael Mann’s war on journalism continues as his lawyers demand the court ban journalists from asking him questions. As part of his war, podcast presenters Phelim McAleer and Ann McElhinney became part of the courtroom drama today. Phelim’s questions to Professor Mann outside the courthouse didn’t please Mann or Mann’s lawyers. But does this justify Mann’s lawyer, John Williams, misrepresenting what happened?

You won’t want to miss Mark Steyn’s eloquent defense of the rights of awkward journalists to ask awkward questions. Will we still be allowed to do our journalism? And what is Bi...

Climate Change Theory is on trial in this long-awaited court case. The trial will ask which is more important in America: climate alarmism, or free speech? 

It has taken over a decade to get to court. On one side is Michael Mann, a climate scientist and activist who claims he was defamed in a 2012 blog by writer and broadcaster Mark Steyn.

Ironically, a trial about climate change was delayed by a Washington DC snowstorm. The trial will also put the climate science field and the administration of Penn State University under the spotlight.

U...

Climate Change on Trial is a daily podcast on one of the most significant court cases in America.

It reveals the truth about Climate Change and asks: "Is there really Free Speech in America?"

Prominent climate scientist Michael Mann is suing writer and broadcaster Mark Steyn alleging an article by Steyn defamed him and his research. 

Mann is perhaps best known for producing the Hockey Stick graph alleging that global temperatures were basically stable for 1500 years until human industrial activity led to an ongoing spike in temperatures.

Steyn claims the graph i...