Staff Reports
Dr. Michael Mann, the so-called “celebrity climate scientist,” has yet again found himself in hot water. This time, he co-authored a study that is supposedly warning us about an impending climate disaster but was funded by an attorney entangled in a high-stakes climate lawsuit. The hypocrisy is astounding! Mann is a regular figure in the climate alarmist crowd, always quick to scream “crisis” and demand drastic measures. But now, we’re seeing how far the tentacles of vested interests reach in the climate debate.
The study, published in a scientific journal, claims we are “hurtling toward climate chaos.” It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to see that this alarmist rhetoric is part of a larger agenda. The author received backing from Roger Worthington, an attorney who is actively suing energy companies for billions. Naturally, this connection was all but hidden in the fine print. How can anyone trust the so-called science when the funding sources are deeply entwined with litigation aimed directly at those very businesses? This is not science; it’s a coordinated effort to sway public opinion against successful American companies.
Climate warrior Mann co-authors work funded in part by attorney with interest in key climate suit https://t.co/FsVtcswmwS
— John Solomon (@jsolomonReports) December 15, 2025
Worthington’s dubious tactics extend beyond Mann’s study. Chevron has argued that the studies presented in court by the plaintiffs have questionable legitimacy due to undisclosed funding and potential conflicts of interest. You have a law firm engaged in climate litigation that also backs scientific studies supporting its case, yet they offer no transparency about that support. This kind of behavior is unacceptable and smells of desperation! Our legal system is supposed to uphold integrity, but it seems that climate warriors are willing to trample that integrity in the name of their agenda.
Instead of facts and unbiased research, we are served a buffet of fear tactics and half-truths designed to brainwash the public into submission. Worthington’s funding plays a critical role in pushing a climate narrative that benefits his legal strategies. This is not about saving the planet; this is about advancing personal interests cloaked in the guise of environmentalism. The courtroom has become a theater for climate activism, with dubious science serving as the script.
And what of the courts? They failed to strike down the questionable research from the record, yet they did express concern over the lack of disclosure by the plaintiffs. This is nothing short of “hiding the ball.” It’s a disgrace when the judiciary calls out the disingenuousness but still allows shoddy research to stand. This lays bare the hypocrisy of the climate litigation movement, which claims to seek truth and accountability while hiding behind vague funding disclosures and questionable methodologies.
If we allow individuals like Mann and Worthington to pull the strings of our environmental debate, we risk losing sight of genuine science and fact-based discussions. The climate alarmism they propagate is rooted not in truth, but in ambition and profit. Are we really going to stand by while our judicial system becomes a tool for activists masquerading as scientists? It’s time to reclaim the narrative and insist on transparency and integrity in climate science. The stakes are too high for anything less. Why should we trust the alarmists when their motives are as clear as mud?
