Ball Bails on Johnson Lawsuit
Tags: Calgary Herald, Calgary Herald, Canada, dan johnson, Friends of Science, Friends Of Science, libel suit, News We made, NRSP, Nrsp, Richard Littlemore, Tim Ball, timothy f ball
The self-styled Canadian climate change expert, Dr. Tim Ball, has abandoned his libel suit against University of Lethbridge Professor of Environmental Science Dan Johnson. Ball dropped the suit without conditions, but also without acknowledging that Johnson’s original comments were accurate and were reported in good faith.
“This is great news,” Dr. Johnson said today, “but it still leaves a cloud over my name that I would like removed. Even though I can now demand that Ball pay what the court calls ‘taxed costs,’ that won’t begin to cover the actual legal bills, to make up for lost time or to repair the damage that Ball has done to my reputation.”
Ball, a spokesperson for two industry front groups fighting against climate change regulation, sued Johnson and the Calgary Herald over a letter the paper ran on April 23, 2006. In an earlier Opinion Page article in which Ball attacked the qualifications of renowned climate change author Tim Flannery, the Herald described Ball as “the first climatology PhD in Canada and … a professor of climatology at the University of Winnipeg for 28 years.”
Johnson wrote a Letter to the Editor challenging those details. He noted that when Ball received his PhD (in Geography) in 1983, “Canada already had PhDs in climatology and it is important to recognize them and their research.” Johnson also pointed out that Ball had been a professor for a much shorter time (Ball later admitted eight years), during which Ball did “not show any evidence of research regarding climate and atmosphere.”
Ball filed suit, asking for damages of $325,000 plus costs.
But Calgary Herald satisfied itself as to the accuracy of Dan Johnson’s letter, and rose in defence. In a Statement of Defence filed with the Alberta Court of Queen’s Bench, the Herald dismissed Ball’s “credibility and credentials as an expert on the issue of global warming,” saying: “The Plantiff (Dr. Ball) is viewed as a paid promoter of the agenda of the oil and gas industry rather than as a practicing scientist.”
In the face of this rebuff, and of the earlier Statement of Defence filed by Dan Johnson, Ball discontinued his lawsuit.
Since his retirement from the University of Winnipeg in 1995, Tim Ball has worked as an industry-supported climate-change campaigner, sowing doubt about the science of global warming. He first associated himself with a Calgary-based group called the Friends of Science, which the Globe and Mail reported in August of 2006 was funded primarily by the oil and gas industry. Ball then moved to the chairmanship of a new group called the Natural Resources Stewardship Project, which the Toronto Star reported in January 2007, is a creation of the Toronto-based energy-industry lobby firm the High Park Group.
“I never intended any specific damage to Tim Ball’s reputation,” Dan Johnson said today. “But climate change is a critical global issue and I thought it was important to set the record straight. If people want to argue the science, I’m all for that, but Tim Ball was claiming expertise and specific credentials that he does not have. That needed to be corrected.”
Johnson said he is now considering whether to accept basic costs or to seek special costs, adding, “I also deserve an apology. I think the nation deserves an apology.”
Johnson said he would like to thank and acknowledge James Hoggan and the team of DeSmogBlog.com for offering considerable assistance in putting together his defence.
I wonder who paid Ball's legal bills. It would be interesting if it was FoS, since people (or corporations) who had money funneled to FoS got a tax deduction when they gave their money to the Calgary Foundation on the supposed belief that it was going to fund "research".
Hopefully CCRA is on top of this.
Ian Forrester
I am not suggesting that no one should be helping with Ball's expenses. What I was asking and suggesting is that if FoS were funding any of his legal bills then CCRA should be investigating since FoS appear to have got a large part of their funding on the basis that donations were tax deductible since they were supposed to be going for "research".
There are various legal terms for this which I will not go into at the moment.
Ian Forrester
...deductible about our funding. Unlike the folks at the Calgary Foundation/U of Calgary Research Foundation/Friends of science, we have not gone to any lengths to hide our funding sources and we have not tried to involve Canada Customs and Revenue as an unwilling co-conspirator.
Our purpose is to search out people who mislead the public about climate change - and, where possible, to provide insight on motive. Dr. Ball is a prime subject and it's been our pleasure to help Dan Johnson where we can.
And yes, of course, we will continue to search for "dirt." If you have any, feel free to pass it along.
And as it happens, the "gentleman in question" has not actually been charged with anything, though the U.S. government continues to press its hand. We'll keep you posted.
sleepfulness antipleuritic aortopathy cerebrorachidian amphidiploid schemeless forewish insolvable
Braxton County Health Profile
http://www.breaktv.com
Great to hear, Dr. Johnson! The real crime committed was the theft of time away from your busy schedule and research projects on some loony lawsuit.
We'll you knew something like this was going to happen, he couldnt go to court and have the judge rule against him. By dropping the suit he can still say the claims/statements made by Dr. Johnson said are false, course even if we know Dr. Johnson spoke the truth about Ball's trumped, spiced, and out right make believe credentials.
Either way, good to see Dr. J on the up side of things with this one.
Carl
Your comments are meaningless since they are nothing more than an anonymous claim. Were Ball such a straight shooter he would never have dropped the suit.
I haven't dropped in on Desmog for a while but I see nothing has changed. They are still obsessed wth Tim Ball -- so preoccupied that they seem not to notice other evil deniers sneaking around their flanks. Did you see the piece by Tim Patterson in the June 20 Financial Post?
When I follow Demsog links to the Friends of Science website I don't see the name Tim Ball anywhere. I know Tim Ball was once with FOS and is now with NRSP. But what is the other industry front group for which Ball is a "spokesperson", to quote Richard Littlemore?
Is Tim Ball really the bete noir Desmoggers say he is? This link -- http://tinyurl.com/2zbfy3 -- takes you to an Owen Sound Sun-Times letter written by Tom Harris of the NRSP. In it, Harris deflates several claims made about Ball by a Desmogg follower. I know all Demoggers will want to read this letter because Desmoggers are all about balance and fairness, right?
http://web.archive.org/web/20051221000742/http://www.friendsofscience.org/
http://web.archive.org/web/20050614234031/http://friendsofscience.org/
http://web.archive.org/web/20060115042556/http://www.friendsofscience.org/
etc.
etc.
etc.
2004:
http://web.archive.org/web/20040724083350/http://envirotruth.org/drball.cfm
2006:
http://web.archive.org/web/20060326235956/http://www.envirotruth.org/drball.cfm
Ball's shifted gears and has joined Not Really Science People (a.k.a. Natural Resources Stewardship Project or NRSP), which is prominently linked on the FOS website.
Collusion? Co-operation?
Collusion, co-operation? Do you actually have any evidence that there is collusion between NRSP and Friends of Science, Stephen? Perhaps a joint press release or joint undertaking, like when Suzuki and Greenpeace announce a joint endeavour? Or is that just more of the sly inuendo that Desmoggers are so good at?
Since the allegation of Ball being a spokesperson for two industry lobby groups was Richard Littlemore's, I think it incumbent upon him to tell us who those two groups are since Friends of Science is obviously not one of them.
And I don't know how Littlemore can claim that NRSP is an industry lobby group since, as Desmoggers tirelessly assert, NRSP will not divulge its donors.
You can't have it both ways, Desmoggers.
The NRSP doesn't want to divulge its list of donors because it will prove these claims correct.
Not likely. The NRSP is hiding their list simply because they know that once it is publicly known that fossil fuel companies are propping them up, their reputation (soiled as it is scientifically) will be completely destroyed as was "Friends of Science" (or as it should be called "Foes of Science" or another term with the same acronym which may not be repeated on DeSmogBlog).
The choice of term "genealogy" below is more to the point, perhaps. But again, the bottom line is "so what?". If I were in NRSP, I would not deny the origins or links to like-minded people, goals and TOR, especially when the change is so recent and people all remember. It is hard to see what is gained from that. That stance would only weaken their argument and potential effectiveness.
Here is the quote from www.sourcewatch.org, for what it is worth:
NRSP's Genealogy
The NRSP maintains it has no direct connection with the Calgary-based group of climate change skeptics the "Friends of Science" [5] (FoS), even though the FoS's most outspoken member, Tim Ball, is now the Chairman of the NRSP. With the exact same purpose and goals, and most of the same scientific allies and members as the Friends of Science, the NRSP is viewed by many as a reincarnation of the FoS, after the FoS was "outed" by The Globe and Mail newspaper in August 2006 as being partly funded by the oil and gas industry. [6].
The NRSP project is led by Executive Director, Tom Harris, who, in November 2002, while in the employ of the public relations firm APCO Worldwide, organized a press conference titled "International Climate Experts Speak Out Against Climate Change Myths." [7]. The press conference was sponsored by Talisman Energy Inc. and Imperial Oil (ExxonMobil's Canadian subsidiary). [8] Many of the same scientists and advisors now linked to the NRSP were present, including Tim Ball.
NRSP describes its "first priority project" as being "Understanding Climate Change: A proactive grassroots campaign to counter the Kyoto Protocol and other greenhouse gas reduction schemes while promoting sensible climate change policy." [9]
Incorporation and Canadian "Letters Patent" and Energy Lobbyists
The Canadian Federal Corporations (CFC) Data Online for the Natural Resources Stewardship Project, Corporation #4326741 BN #818837072RC0001, reports that the Natural Resources Stewardship Project was registered effective "2005/10/21" under the Canada Corporations Act - Part II.
According to the Department of Industry, Canada Corporations Act, the Natural Resources Stewardship Project of "Toronto, Ont." was granted letters patent number 432674-1 on "21/10/2005".—Government Notices published December 3, 2005, in the Canada Gazette [10]
NRSP's original address was 263 Roncesvalles Avenue Suite 2, Toronto, Ontario M6R2L9. [11] This is the same address as that for the High Park Advocacy Group, which is located at Suite 4.
end of quote
Source:
http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Natural_Resources_Stewardship_Project#NRSP.27s_Genealogy
If you had any proof of collaboration or cooperation between Friends of Science and NRSP, you would have offered it, Dan. Instead you post stuff that states what we already know -- Tim Ball once belonged to FOS and now heads up NRSP. And the two organizations share similar views on climate change. Big deal. There are lots of like-minded groups on both sides of this issue with considerable overlap among the individuals involved.
How come Richard Littlemore is silent on this subject? He's the one who alleges that Ball is a shill for two industry-front groups and offers links to NRSP and Friends of Science, presumbly to leave the impression that those are the two groups he has in mind.
Ummm, John, are you blind? Here is a list of everyone involved with NRSP:
Timothy F. Ball
Tom Harris
Ian Clark
Tim Patterson
Vincent Gray
Sallie Baliunas
Fred Michel
R.M. (Bob) Carter
Paul Copper
Paavo Siitam
Madhav Khandekar
Rob Scagel
Tad Murty
Garth W. Paltridge
Ian Plimer
Gary D. Sharp
Lee C. Gerhard
Fred Singer
David R. Legates
Nils-Axel Mörner
Richard S. Lindzen
Robert Balling
Al Pekarek
Wibjörn Karlén
Peter Dietze
Hans Erren
Hans H.J. Labohm
David Wojick
Art Robinson
Hugh W. Ellsaesser
Howard C. Hayden
Zbigniew Jaworowski
Richard Courtney
Here is the "Scientific Advisory Board" of FOS:
Sallie Baliunas
Chris de Freitas
Madhav Khandekar
Tim Patterson
Three of the four names on the SAB of FOS are representatives of NRSP. Also, many names on the recommended reading list of FOS are the same as those who are affiliated with NRSP.
Also, read these:
http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Friends_of_Science
http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Natural_Resources_Stewardship_Project
If you still see no connection between the two "astroturf" groups, you'd better get your eyes examined!
If you visit the NRSP web site and look under "News", you will see that this group has been quite effective getting its views published in the mainstream media. Maybe, with addtional time, the mainstream media will take note of what skeptical scientists are saying about AGW and will actually inject some balance into their on-going coverage of climate change issues. One can only hope.
It seems to me that NSRP's recent media success is a direct rebuke to the efforts of Desmoggers and others to denigrate and marginalize those skeptical of AGW. Desmog's efforts to attack the messengers are obvously failing. Maybe it is time to deal with the messages.
Because that is what fair-minded people do. If someone makes a point and offers solid, objective evidence to support that view, a Desmoggger hinting that this person has links to an oil company is irrelevant. It doesn't change the truth of what was said.
And insisting that the science is settled when clearly it isn't just makes Desmoggers look like fools.
JD = TH?
If you want to find more related article about genealogy or family tree, try hiring a freelancer at Freelancer.com to do the job. They are good at listing missing people or finding your ancestor. Use this code "FAMILYTREE" to find better bid. Good luck
Cool...
We like it:
Quoted from
http://www.desmogblog.com/tim-ball-vs-dan-johnson-update-0
The Defendents [Calgary Herald] state that the Plaintiff [Tim Ball] never held a reputation in the scientific community as a noted climatologist and authority on global warming. The particulars of the Plaintiff’s reputation are as follows:
a) The Plaintiff has never published any research in any peer-reviewed scientific journal which addressed the topic of human contributions to greenhouse gass and global emissions;
b) The Plaintiff has published no papers on climatology in academically recognized peer-reviewed scientific journals since his retirement as a Professor in 1996.
c) The Plantiff’s credentials and credibility as an expert on the issue of global warming have been repeatedly disparaged in the media; and
d) The Plaintiff is viewed as a paid promoter of the agenda of the oil and gas industry rather than as a practicing scientist.
Carbon tax a bust? Looks like E.U. members are suffering from carbon tax plans and Kyoto commitments. Last night (September 22, 2008) on Mike Duffy live the first hint that the national media is starting to question global warming. Here is a little article about the great Elizabeth May for your enjoyment.
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/GIS.Servlets.HTMLTemplate?current_row=1&tf=tgam/columnists/FullColumn.html&cf=tgam/columnists/FullColumn.cfg&configFileLoc=tgam/config&date=&dateOffset=&hub=margaretWente&title=Margaret_Wente&cache_key=margaretWente&start_row=1&num_rows=1
The World Glacier Monitoring Service collects data annually on glacier retreat and glacier mass balance From this data, glaciers worldwide have been shown to be shrinking significantly, with strong glacier retreats in the 1940s, stable or growing conditions during the 1920s and 1970s, and again increasing rates of ice loss from the mid 1980s to present. Mass balance data indicate 17 consecutive years of negative glacier mass balance. Meanwhile, Playstation 2 is among the most successful gaming platforms of all time. Despite its release back in 2000, the Playstation 2 is still a top seller, and is the best selling gaming console to date. You won't need payday loans to get one anymore either, as Sony has announced a PS2 price cut down to $100. The library of games is extensive, and Sony is still releasing games for the PS2, 8 years after its release. Other game consoles were in direct competition, as the console upon release was immediately in competition with Nintendo and Microsoft game platforms, both of which did well but not nearly as well as the Playstation 2.
A certain amount of knowledge regarding lawsuit loans and lawsuit is always helpful. Most of the times we do not need such news because we are not involved in a lawsuit it is only when we are personally involved in a lawsuit that we starting searching about lawsuit. Yet the most simplest of lawsuit news can be an eye opener.