Ep. 5 | Mann In the Box

Climate Change on Trial

Unreported Story Society

Science

4.9 • 942 Ratings

🗓️ 24 January 2024

⏱️ 54 minutes

🔗️ Recording | iTunes | RSS

🧾️ Download transcript

Summary

Finally, after 12 years of litigation and delay, Professor Michael Mann goes into the witness box.

Is he entitled to millions of dollars in damages for two short articles written over a decade ago?

In a packed episode, you’ll also hear writer and broadcaster, Mark Steyn, in combative form, pushing back against Michael Mann's lawyer. You’ll hear Steyn explain why he believes Mann benefited from a corrupt Penn State “phony investigation“. And you’ll hear questions about Mark Steyn’s educational qualifications, and if he really is “Doctor Dropout.”

Then Michael Mann gets to present his case to the jury. You’ll hear him claim that his reputation was damaged by the comparison of Penn State’s investigation into him with the investigation into Jerry Sandusky. Listen to Mann’s under-oath defense of the infamous “hide the decline” email from the ClimateGate dump. And Mann is questioned about describing an academic who questioned his statistics as “a white supremacist.”

Transcript

Click on a timestamp to play from that location

0:00.0	Hello and
0:05.0	welcome to climate change on trial. I'm Anne Macklehenny and I'm
0:07.6	Phila McElier. This is a daily podcast from inside the DC
0:10.4	defamation trial of writer and broadcaster Mark Stein.
0:14.0	Stein has been sued for defamation by climate scientist Professor Michael Mann.
0:19.0	Stein described Mann's famous hockey stick graph as a fraud. Man is also suing writer Ran Simburg
0:26.7	who made similar comments. So we're presenting this podcast in a very special way by
0:31.0	having actors re-enact verbatim the most exciting
0:34.1	exchanges in court that day. So welcome to climate change on trial day five.
0:39.7	Man in the Box.
0:48.0	So today Stein was still under questioning from Man's Lawyer, Megal Man's Lawyer, John Williams.
0:51.0	He started answering questions yesterday, but in the morning we had a
0:55.1	course a high drama a fire alarm just before we started. Fire alarm started and was one of
0:59.8	those funny things and they write about this in books by the way that you know people
1:03.4	the tendency is for people when a fire alarm goes off to not move at all.
1:07.0	I have to say Phil and Mackelier and myself both stood up and put our coats on ready for off and
1:12.1	the judge looked incredibly relaxed and said
1:14.3	if you can all trust me would we could we wait maybe perhaps 45 seconds and I
1:20.5	thought and then there was sycophantic laughter all round.
1:24.0	But I actually thought clearly it appeared that this has not been the first time that a fire alarm
1:29.4	has gone off in the courtroom.
1:31.0	And you wanted to talk on... well, first of all, you know, let's give a little summary of what the case is about.
	...

Please login to see the full transcript.

Previous episode | Next episode

Disclaimer: The podcast and artwork embedded on this page are from Unreported Story Society, and are the property of its owner and not affiliated with or endorsed by Tapesearch.

Generated transcripts are the property of Unreported Story Society and are distributed freely under the Fair Use doctrine. Transcripts generated by Tapesearch are not guaranteed to be accurate.