Climate scientist Michael Mann has won a defamation lawsuit against two conservative writers who compared his work on global heating to the actions of a child molester. The jury awarded Mann $1 million in damages.
The case dates back 12 years and has finally concluded with a victory for Mann. In a statement posted on Mann’s Twitter account, one of his lawyers expressed satisfaction with the verdict, stating that it vindicates Mann’s reputation and is a triumph for truth and scientists around the world.
Mann gained prominence for his publication of a graph in 1998, known as the “hockey stick,” which illustrated a significant rise in global temperatures. The graph showed that temperatures in the northern hemisphere remained relatively stable for 900 years before rapidly increasing in the 20th century.
His work received widespread recognition and was included in a report by a United Nations climate panel in 2001. It was also featured in Al Gore’s acclaimed 2006 documentary on climate change, “An Inconvenient Truth.”
In 2009, emails from Mann and other scientists were leaked, leading to allegations that Mann manipulated data. However, investigations by Penn State University and the Associated Press found no evidence of data misuse.
Despite this exoneration, in 2012, the Competitive Enterprise Institute published a blogpost by Rand Simberg that compared the investigations into Mann’s work to the case of Jerry Sandusky, a convicted child molester. Simberg described Mann as the “Jerry Sandusky of climate science,” accusing him of “molesting and torturing data.” Mark Steyn later referred to Simberg’s article in his own piece for National Review, labeling Mann’s research as fraudulent.
Mann filed a lawsuit against both writers and their publishers. In 2021, a judge dismissed the publishers as defendants, but the claims against the individuals remained. Simberg and Steyn argued that their statements were a matter of opinion.
The recent jury trial in the District of Columbia superior court concluded after four weeks, resulting in punitive damages of $1,000 against Simberg and $1 million against Steyn. Mann expressed hope that the verdict would send a message that attacking climate scientists falsely is not protected speech.
