decoration decoration
Stories

GROKLAW
When you want to know more...
decoration
For layout only
Home
Archives
Site Map
Search
About Groklaw
Awards
Legal Research
Timelines
ApplevSamsung
ApplevSamsung p.2
ArchiveExplorer
Autozone
Bilski
Cases
Cast: Lawyers
Comes v. MS
Contracts/Documents
Courts
DRM
Gordon v MS
GPL
Grokdoc
HTML How To
IPI v RH
IV v. Google
Legal Docs
Lodsys
MS Litigations
MSvB&N
News Picks
Novell v. MS
Novell-MS Deal
ODF/OOXML
OOXML Appeals
OraclevGoogle
Patents
ProjectMonterey
Psystar
Quote Database
Red Hat v SCO
Salus Book
SCEA v Hotz
SCO Appeals
SCO Bankruptcy
SCO Financials
SCO Overview
SCO v IBM
SCO v Novell
SCO:Soup2Nuts
SCOsource
Sean Daly
Software Patents
Switch to Linux
Transcripts
Unix Books

Gear

Groklaw Gear

Click here to send an email to the editor of this weblog.


You won't find me on Facebook


Donate

Donate Paypal


No Legal Advice

The information on Groklaw is not intended to constitute legal advice. While Mark is a lawyer and he has asked other lawyers and law students to contribute articles, all of these articles are offered to help educate, not to provide specific legal advice. They are not your lawyers.

Here's Groklaw's comments policy.


What's New

STORIES
No new stories

COMMENTS last 48 hrs
No new comments


Sponsors

Hosting:
hosted by ibiblio

On servers donated to ibiblio by AMD.

Webmaster
couple of notes | 198 comments | Create New Account
Comments belong to whoever posts them. Please notify us of inappropriate comments.
NR response to Mann's lawsuit threat
Authored by: Gringo_ on Wednesday, October 24 2012 @ 11:47 AM EDT
While Mann's "hockey stick" graph depicting climate change was bogus, I really think NR was over the top in their criticism of Mann...

Mann could be said to be the Jerry Sandusky of climate science, except that instead of molesting children, he has molested and tortured data in the service of politicized science that could have dire economic consequences for the nation and planet.

Comparing Mann to an infamous child molester is extreme and uncalled for, and beyond that, it trivializes child molestation. I support Mann in this instance.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

NR sound slimy in this case.
Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, October 24 2012 @ 12:03 PM EDT
I support free speech, but I'm not comfortable with the idea
of the press making wild accusations against someone
(fraudulent, comparisons to a child molester etc), and then
using the inevitable complaint as a chance to go on a
fishing expedition to further their editorial objectives.

I don't know anything about this potential case or the
history other than what is in that article, but NR comes
across badly to me, even if they haven't broken any laws
with their accusations.

Saying someone is fraudulent is a very different matter to
saying they are wrong, biased, misinformed or whatever.

Frankly I suspect a fishing expedition into scientific
records by a hostile agency is guaranteed to throw up stuff
they can misunderstand or misconstrue regardless of anything
untoward being present (which there may or may not be - I
have no idea).

Reading that article has given me a profoundly negative
opinion on NR.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

couple of notes
Authored by: YurtGuppy on Wednesday, October 24 2012 @ 01:20 PM EDT
It was blog posting on National Review Online not an article in the NR
magazine. (I do not know if they do "editorial" oversight of the NRO
blog. But Mann wanted a take down and didn't get it. So the real issue, to me,
is blog takedown.)

Mark Stein replies (another NRO post)

http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/331497/nobel-mann-takes-revolting-peasants-
mark-steyn

---
a small fish in an even smaller pond

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

Groklaw © Copyright 2003-2013 Pamela Jones.
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners.
Comments are owned by the individual posters.

PJ's articles are licensed under a Creative Commons License. ( Details )