No, but what Professor Mann did is. An illogical, misinformed editorial at Science.

[Update a while later]

A few more thoughts on the case from Will Bates.

[Friday-morning update]

The latest over at Mark Steyn’s place: “So the net result of Mann vs Simberg is that Mann owes Simberg $8,587.64. Pay up, you deadbeat.”

Well, he actually owes it to both me and CEI, and we have to split it, so he only owes me a little over four times the (soon to be likely reduced) judgment. Here is our latest filing.

[Late-morning update]

The battle between skeptics and climate “dictators“: “Skepticism is a necessary aspect of the scientific discovery process. During the trial, however, skeptics such as Curry were not allowed to testify, despite her having prepared a 54-page report for the court on the hockey stick science, which was highly critical of Mann’s work.”

Judy did testify, but only as a fact witness, not an expert witness.

[Early-afternoon update]

Mike’s Legal Trick.