43 ms·

For those interested, here is the outcome of the case: https://retractionwatch.com/2020/07/09/stanford-prof-ordered-to-pay-legal-fees-after-dropping-10-million-

by Ballas 4y ago

For those interested, here is the outcome of the case: https://retractionwatch.com/2020/07/09/stanford-prof-ordered-to-pay-legal-fees-after-dropping-10-million-defamation-case-against-another-scientist/ https://retractionwatch.com/2020/07/09/stanford-prof-ordered... TLDR: He dropped the case and said he expected them to settle. They were awarded costs in an anti-SLAPP suit.

DennisP 4y ago
Despite all that, Jacobson's work gets uncritical acclaim in the popular press to this day, even as other scientists keep pointing out problems with it.
- danuker 4y ago
  - eru 4y ago
    They aren't.
    - witrak 4y ago
      Really? What country do you live in?
      - michaelt 4y ago
        The media are often a mouthpiece for the highest bidder when we're talking about their billionaire owners, and multinationals spending a lot on advertising, and industry press wanting access to exclusive previews, and industries handing out freebies like 'review samples' and flying people to product launches in exotic locations. However, academic climate scientists are none of these. More likely journalists see "stanford climate scientist" saying something that seems right to them, and they don't look much further than that.
      - eru 4y ago
        See eg https://slatestarcodex.com/2019/09/18/too-much-dark-money-in-almonds/ https://slatestarcodex.com/2019/09/18/too-much-dark-money-in...
dahdum 4y ago
Last I can find is that Stanford has been ordered to cover ~$70k of Jacobson’s legal fees by the CA Labor Commissioner. If that holds I wonder if we can expect more spurious lawsuits from CA professors, knowing their employer will be forced to backstop them. https://retractionwatch.com/2022/09/12/stanford-prof-appeals-order-to-pay-428k-in-legal-fees-after-dropping-defamation-suit/ https://retractionwatch.com/2022/09/12/stanford-prof-appeals...

43 ms·

For those interested, here is the outcome of the case: https://retractionwatch.com/2020/07/09/stanford-prof-ordered-to-pay-legal-fees-after-dropping-10-million-

by Ballas 4y ago

DennisP 4y ago
Despite all that, Jacobson's work gets uncritical acclaim in the popular press to this day, even as other scientists keep pointing out problems with it.
- danuker 4y ago
  - eru 4y ago
    They aren't.
    - witrak 4y ago
      Really? What country do you live in?
      - michaelt 4y ago
        The media are often a mouthpiece for the highest bidder when we're talking about their billionaire owners, and multinationals spending a lot on advertising, and industry press wanting access to exclusive previews, and industries handing out freebies like 'review samples' and flying people to product launches in exotic locations. However, academic climate scientists are none of these. More likely journalists see "stanford climate scientist" saying something that seems right to them, and they don't look much further than that.
      - eru 4y ago
        See eg https://slatestarcodex.com/2019/09/18/too-much-dark-money-in-almonds/ https://slatestarcodex.com/2019/09/18/too-much-dark-money-in...
dahdum 4y ago
Last I can find is that Stanford has been ordered to cover ~$70k of Jacobson’s legal fees by the CA Labor Commissioner. If that holds I wonder if we can expect more spurious lawsuits from CA professors, knowing their employer will be forced to backstop them. https://retractionwatch.com/2022/09/12/stanford-prof-appeals-order-to-pay-428k-in-legal-fees-after-dropping-defamation-suit/ https://retractionwatch.com/2022/09/12/stanford-prof-appeals...