Frederick Weisberg is apparently part of the global CO2 conspiracy and in charge of the inquisition heresy trial side of it. It is simply a fact that Michael Mann took a bunch of data, shoved it in the the maw of his GIGO data manipulator, masticator, mauler, twister, molester and torturer, getting out an envelope of extrapolated made up muck which bore no relationship to what reality subsequently did.
Wow... where is your proof?
Maybe Weisberg is totally ignorant about science, but GIGO computers are not science and their output is not science. In the case of CO2, it is totally a political method of gaining opm by the giga$buck and establishing socialist rules across the planet. Michael Mann is a politician and has been politically active in promoting politicians who go along with his ideology.
The judge doesn't have to be knowledgeable about science.. He has to be knowledgeable about "The Law".
It's up to the attorneys on both sides to "educate" him and the Jury.
Period.
Frederick Weisberg should state for the record whether he is a believer in anthropogenic CO2 causing global warming and an Obama fan club member. If so, he should declare himself biased and stand aside.
If you can prove it... go for it.. otherwise you are just ranting.
Weisberg should have taken a look at what Mark Steyn wrote, compared it with reality as demonstrated by reality, and what Michael Mann did with the data and thrown the case out as totally absurd. Especially since Michael Mann passed himself off as a Nobel Prize winner in his lawsuit, and that the original defamation claim was that defaming a Nobel Prize winner was the issue. It's laughable.
Your "opinion".
Not worth anything in a court of law.
The suggestion that judges are such self-dealing crooks is far more showing contempt of them than Mark Steyn's comments. The reason judges' decisions are often reversed is because they are as far from papal infallibility as most other human thinking.
Again, where is your proof?
Judges do make mistakes from time to time and that sometimes results in appeals.
If.... they have merit.
Eric |
