Already knew that. Should I care? Everybody in this debate is paid by somebody aligned with their views.
Amusing, but who cares. He doesn't rely on the Bible as authority for his scientific analysis. Other great scientists (e.g. Einstein) have/had strong religious views that I don't happen to share. I'm sure there are several on the other side of the debate.
Not surprising that Mann is suing. His scientific credibility and career are at stake. Let's see who wins, and why. However, the issue in the suit doesn't turn on the science that Ball is relying upon for his scientific point of view. The ruling in the suit might undermine his claim that the other side is deliberately misrepresenting the data.
You haven't provided a link here, so hard to say whether this is relevant. Probably not, I'd venture.
Weird allegation in the context of this debate. The article that's linked to is so unreadable it's hard to divine what it's saying. I couldn't see anywhere in that article where his witness was found to be a pederast. Doesn't it say that O'Sullivan was acquitted of charges? That aside, not sure why this weird allegation should undermine the science Ball is relying on.
I think the data and analysis that he relies upon is interesting, coherent, and persuasive. I'd be happy to look at link where someone systematically attacks his presentation. Not interested in the silliness of the surrounding legal battles.
