You'd think that would be it wouldn't you, given the denial blogs' commentary on this. But, as usual, they're misleading you.
----
Fristly:
Here's the public data which you/your sources claim Mann hasn't made available for the court. Your source is clearly wrong on this. Mann indicated to the Courts that this was public domain, freely available.http://www.meteo.psu.edu/holocene/public_html/shared/research/MANNETAL98/---
Secondly:
The Mann v Ball case was settled out of Court. Why?
In a similar case for defamation, that Ball was defending (Weaver v Ball, that I link the Court ruling for, below), the judge found Ball incompetent and non-believable by any reasonable person. By law, this meant his comments could not be regarded as defamatory. Because no reasonable person would believe him.It's similar for Mann v Ball. Ball begged off citing age and ill health. Mann agreed to settle out of court. No point proceeding against a guy who isn't deemed credible enough to be defamatory.Here's the Court Ruling from Ball vs Weaver
In which Weaver brought an "action in defamation seeking damages from Dr Ball"
https://www.bccourts.ca/jdb-txt/sc/18/02/2018BCSC0205.htmClauses 60-64 speak to Tim Ball's lack of credibility
Clause 75 finds Ball not advancing credible argument, so that a reasonable and thoughtful person is unlikely to place any stock in Dr Ball's views
and finds Ball's comments similarly lacking credibility compared to a case where comments were found to not be defamatory because they were so ludicrous and outrageous to be unbelievable.---
There's some more info specifically on Mann v Ball but i am doing other stuff, so have timed out on this post for now. I may find and post the other bits on the Mann v Ball case when I can. But it's just Mann's lawyer's statement confirming the above regarding Ball's desire to withdraw due to health and delay and the low impact Ball's comments had.
----
Denial looses again. But, as usual, the denial blogosphere makes big effort to mislead again. The first several hits on my google search were all denial blog sites spinning this misleadingly to heck.
Same old same old.
