Opinion: Why calling a climate scientist a fraud crosses a line on defamation
To the editor: National Review editor Rich Lowry does a grave disservice by misleading readers about our libel suit against his organization. Never mind that he fails to disclose that my research with other scientists that yielded the “hockey stick” curve (see “The Hockey Stick and the Climate Wars” for details) has been replicated and extended by dozens of subsequent studies since 1999.
Our lawsuit is not about scientific orthodoxy, nor an attack on freedom of speech, as Lowry claims. Just as the 1st Amendment does not permit one to falsely shout “fire” in a crowded theater, one may not falsely accuse a scientist of fraud in their professional work, which is precisely what Lowry’s organization did.
While Lowry may believe it’s advantageous to distract the public with cries of 1st Amendment violations, two courts and five judges that have considered the question have rejected this smokescreen. In fact, the latest ruling, from the highest court in the District of Columbia, characterized the National Review’s assertions as “noxious.” Now, it is time for a jury to decide.
Michael Mann, University Park, Pa.
The writer is the director of the Earth System Science Center at Penn State University.
Follow the Opinion section on Twitter @latimesopinion and Facebook
A cure for the common opinion
Get thought-provoking perspectives with our weekly newsletter.
You may occasionally receive promotional content from the Los Angeles Times.
