Bruce Dowbiggin
The Right To Criticize Climate Change Has Cost Mark Steyn Almost Everything

“Whenever you hear the consensus of scientists agrees on something or other, reach for your wallet, because you’re being had.” author Michael Crichton, 2003
It’s a fair guess that when historians look back at the current era it will not be referred to as The Enlightenment. The purpose of our contemporary scientific inquiry, as those deceived by the Covid hustle will know, is not shedding light but shrouding and blinding honest inquiry.
If The Enlightenment was a ray of sunshine to expose truth, then the Suppression is a blow torch to destroy discussion.
Nothing better illustrates this destruction of creative scientific debate than the current Mann v Steyn, Simberg lawsuit. Climate-science salesman Michael Mann sued Rand Simberg and Canadian Mark Steyn in 2012 for defamation after the two men publicly disparaged Mann’s “hockey stick” graph that purported to prove that the late twentieth-century warmth in the Northern Hemisphere was unprecedented during at least the last 1,000 years.
Two Canadians, my friend Michael McIntyre and Ross McKitrick, then snapped the hockey stick narrative, leaving Mann vexed and his Green buddies vengeful. Steyn gleefully took up their findings. (Those familiar with Steyn will know that his facility with words is withering upon his subjects.) Mann decided to sue Steyn and Simberg in the Democratic swamp of the District of Columbia, arguing they’d ruined his reputation and devastated him financially.
Howler monkeys in Legacy Media (hello Bill Nye) sensed a kill and a chance to remove an annoying “denialst” But, like his successful 2012 defence of a free-speech case in Canada while Steyn wrote at Macleans, Mann v Steyn, Simberg is not about science or policy. It’s about the U.S. First Amendment guaranteeing free speech, something the Left used to cherish (see: The People vs Larry Flynt.)
For the Al Gore glee club, dissent is heresy. So, for various reasons, none of them good, the case stalled in the D.C. court system for 12 years, costing Steyn his health (he’s in a wheelchair after suffering three heart attacks) and millions in legal fees. The case has finally come to court and is now with the jury. Because D.C. juries— and D.C. media— are highly partisan to climate-change Democrats predicting an outcome is foolhardy.
But after being raked in testimony for his case Mann— who has not paid a cent in legal costs— will likely not be advertising this as his shining moment. “Ill-advised and embarrassing” “thin-skinned and quick to attack.” Seeks “conflict, seeking to pick fights” and “Mann did in fact breach the ethical standards” are snippets of the testimony he endured. So far, his powerful groupies ranging the Clintons to the Biden are staying loyal.
Steyn, too, has his wounds from his principled fight. Most would have saved their sanity. He has said many times that the process of defending himself against the insanity of WOKEdom is the punishment itself. Seeing him physically struggle in court to deliver his case is ample proof of the price he’s paid for mocking the party line on climate.
(Note: We are unabashed fans of Steyn’s work since he began warning of a coming Dark Age brought on by unlimited immigration and Leftist overreach. This website <NotThePublicBroadcaster.com> is in no small measure a homage to his courage and vision.)
But here we are. No matter the outcome, the coordinated forces of censorship and intimidation will have a partial victory by showing what even a correct criticism of them brings. As they are doing with their legal and political mobbing of Donald Trump they are warning any future critics that they, not science, will re-write the past and create the future.
The implications the Left has invited with its acceptance of climate change, DEI, ESG and the many other acid acronyms are widespread. As just one example, we have been preparing a book on an academic institution whose focus is on the preservation of the culture, art and significance of the Middle Ages.
We have asked a number of the interview subjects for their predictions on why the events of a thousand years ago (or earlier) are significant. What do they tell us about our present state of anti-humanist culture? Is their hope for a new enlightenment in a WOKE world?
The urge to re-write the past to suit today’s political whims, said one subject, is fatal to academic and cultural appreciation of the time of Chaucer, Dante and Bede. Her field of study, she said, is white Christian men in Europe a thousand years or so ago. She cannot change that description. Nor will she allow the re-writing of this period of history by ahistorical radicals seeking to bolster the present by falsifying the past. Is that the end of her funding?
That is what Mann sought in engineering the climate record of proxies in a handful of pine cone and ice core samples in eastern Russia. Like most climate diehards, he claimed to see lower temperatures in the past, thereby making today’s readings seem hotter. This allowed gormless climate wind therapists like Barack Obama to claim that 97 percent of scientists agree with Mann’s “consensus” on climate change— a claim repeated endlessly by the climate cabal. This support empowered Mann to sue anyone who disputed his conclusions.
The late author Michel Crichton saw this Ship of Fools coming in 2003 when he warned, “I regard consensus science as an extremely pernicious development that ought to be stopped cold in its tracks. Historically, the claim of consensus has been the first refuge of scoundrels; it is a way to avoid debate by claiming that the matter is already settled..”
Sadly, Crichton died in 2008, and Mann and hysterics like Greta Thunberg went unchecked into the bloodstream of Western society. The bland acceptance of “the effects of climate change” commercials now being peddled by Justin Trudeau’s governments is testament to the power of this lie. (Asking a climate scientist about the impacts of global warming is like asking a bureaucrat about the benefit of larger government.)
Mark Steyn and Rand Simberg sought to mock that pretence. They may even win their legal case. But the herculean struggle just to remind the public of some simple truths on science tells you that we are in dangerous times populated by scoundrels and opportunists who will not be stopped until they dictate every aspect of society.
Bruce Dowbiggin @dowbboy is the editor of Not The Public Broadcaster A two-time winner of the Gemini Award as Canada’s top television sports broadcaster, he’s a regular contributor to Sirius XM Canada Talks Ch. 167. Inexact Science: The Six Most Compelling Draft Years In NHL History, his new book with his son Evan, was voted the seventh-best professional hockey book of all time by bookauthority.org . His 2004 book Money Players was voted sixth best on the same list, and is available via brucedowbigginbooks.ca.
Bruce Dowbiggin
Kirk’s Killing: Which Side Can Count on the Military’s Loyalty Now?

“After every armistice, you want to put us away in mothballs, like the fleet. When it comes to a little dying you’ll be sure to put us in a uniform…” Seven Days in May
In the 1964 political film Seven Days in May, a rogue Director of the U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff conspires to launch a coup against a failing president who’s just signed a nuclear disarmament treaty with the Soviets. The plot is uncovered by a Marine Corps colonel, and the coup is barely averted with all the conspirators apprehended.
In 1964 the notion that the loyalty of the military/ intelligence services might be compromised was a hot topic in the days afterJFK’s assassination. After calming down in the Reagan days— remember Woody Allen’s revolution spoof Bananas?— it has now returned.
How likely is a military/ intelligence coup? Loyalty of troops has been crucial in many coups and insurrections around the world. Famously the socialist regime of Salvador Allende was crushed in 1973 when the Chilean military staged a bloody coup. Allende and thousands were murdered as General Augusto Pinochet took over the country.
Still, the conceit in Western nations has always been “It can’t happen here”. The institutions of government are believed too strong and independent to allow themselves to be taken over by their militaries. The chattering classes prefer to see their military as Stanley Kubrick did in Dr. Strangelove— bumbling buffoons, lackeys led by General Buck Turgidson.

Certainly in Canada, where successive Liberal government culminated with Justin Trudeau, the Kubrick model is closer to reality. DEI hiring, cuts to budgets and a slavish reliance on America to protect Canada for free have produced a Canadian military with more in common with HMS Pinafore than Vimy Ridge. From the world’s third-largest navy in 1945, Canada is now a boat that can’t float.
But something seems to have changed with the Tuesday murder of conservative commentator Charlie Kirk. It seems a massive provocation by people who want to destroy the American society. It’s not helped by the voices on the Left claiming he brought it on himself with hate speech. @punishedmother “Maybe Charlie Kirk shouldn’t have spent years being a hateful demagogic fascist and this wouldn’t have happened. Maybe he should take some personal responsibility.It will take careful leadership to prevent this boiling over.”
This growing intolerance between the political sides exposed yet again by Kirk’s assassination has made people consider the Armed Forces’ loyalty in a crisis. As in, who has it? (In pacifist Canada the current clash of cultures is that support of the military might be necessary in resisting the conservative right. Despite Bill C-23 disarming Canadians the unarmed Left might face a large, well-armed rightwing population brandishing weapons.)
In a divided America think of Tom Cruise’s JAG character in A Few Good Men confronting hardened Marine commandant played by Jack Nicholson— and you have the conflict. “You can’ t take the truth!” Fighting generals are a thing of the past when Democrats are in power. Successive presidents have used DEI to create desk generals and commanders who reflect good taste over good planning.

This DEI mission creep in the military was one of Donald Trump’s strongest planks in defeating hapless Kamala Harris in the 2024 election. Canadian Liberals, meanwhile, managed to dodge their pathetic defence shortcomings only by making the 2025 election all about Trump and a 51st state, not defence or Chinese influence.
There has been evidence that some at the highest levels of the U.S. military, CIA and FBI have already shown a bias toward Democrats. In the waning days of Trump 45 Chief of Staff Mark Milley told the Chinese leadership— America’s No. 1 global rival— that he would personally tip them off if Trump launched a surprise attack on China.
In another time (or movie) Milley’s treachery would been seen as treasonous, punishable by a life in the stockade or, possibly, execution. In the hands of the DC Media Party, however, Milley’s partisan gambit was buried in the run-up to the 2020 election. As with the concurrent Hunter Biden laptop scandal, the story was made to disappear in a welter of Trump demonization and legal harassment
Now we must wonder again. Sadly for Harris, Milley and Team Obama, the Democrats were thrashed by the Trump agenda. POTUS 45—now 47— quickly began replacing lifetime loyalists in the military and bureaucrats, stifling for now the urge to purge,
Again this scenario was unthinkable a generation ago, a plot in a movie. But the governments of Barack Obama and Joe Biden (Trudeau in Canada) have created a social schism that has turned politics into a blood sport. As we know there were two attempts on Trump in the election campaign by deranged radicals. The defeated Democrats’ obsession over who controls the Supreme Court and Congress in Trump’s presidency, the repeated comparisions to Hitler, are producing greater and more strident anything-is-accepted calls from the radical Left to take to the streets and pursue civil disobedience.
In Canada Mark Carney’s Elbows Up gambit is dissipating rapidly since the election, producing active discussion of separation in Alberta and Quebec (again). This raises questions about what the military might do in the aftermath of a vote by either side to leave Canada. Might they intervene? Would they stand aside? Will tanks roll to protect a Carney Canada?
No doubt Charlie Kirk’s death will be mobilized by both sides in their appeals for the loyalty of the military should a civil war break out in the U.S. Get your generals in a row. MSNBC’s Jen Psaki has declared Trump’s tribute to Kirk “an escalation” Says legal expert Jonathan Turley, “We are already at political assassinations, so I am not sure how much more room for escalation there may be for Psaki or MSNBC.”
Bruce Dowbiggin @dowbboy is the editor of Not The Public Broadcaster A two-time winner of the Gemini Award as Canada’s top television sports broadcaster, his new book Deal With It: The Trades That Stunned The NHL And Changed hockey is now available on Amazon. Inexact Science: The Six Most Compelling Draft Years In NHL History, his previous book with his son Evan, was voted the seventh-best professional hockey book of all time by bookauthority.org . His 2004 book Money Players was voted sixth best on the same list, and is available via brucedowbigginbooks.ca.
Bruce Dowbiggin
Ken Dryden: Hockey’s Diogenes. He Called Them As He Saw Them

There is much talk about the Canadian identity in these days of mass immigration , diversity and refusal to integrate. The 1970s were a simpler time for such rumination on culture, however. Riding the new global identity of Pierre Trudeau (soon to be regretted), the times were fired by the 1972 hockey summit win by Canada over the Soviet Union.
The series contained many of the self-held perceptions of the nation. Plucky underdog. Tenacious competitor in global affairs. Limitless possibilities. All seemingly rolled up into two weeks 53 years ago this month. Many of these notions were still manifest in the 2025 federal election when Boomers had a conniption fit over Donald Trump and withdrew into their Elbows Up phase.
So it should come as no surprise that one of the stars of that 1972 team was goalie Ken Dryden. While not being dominant throughout against the shifty Soviets, Dryden peaked at the right moments (in tandem with Tony Esposito) to snatch the eight-game series at absolutely the final possible moment.

It’s hardly an exaggeration that, while a number of the Canadian players lost their minds in the tense fortnight, Dryden carried himself with cool dignity. There were no Phil Esposito jeremiads. Not Jean Paul Parisé stick wielding. No Bobby Clare two-handers to the ankles of his opponents. Just the emerging figure of the lanky goalie resting his chin on his stick as he waited in the net for Kharlamov and Yakushev.
For the generation that watched him develop he was likely the quintessential modern Canadian. Son of a charitable community figure. Educated in the Ivy League. Obtained his law degree. Served as a federal cabinet minister. Author of several definitive hockey books (The Game is perhaps the best sports non-fiction in the English language). Executive of the Toronto Maple Leafs. And more.
He was on the American telecast of the 1980 U.S. Miracle On Ice at Lake Placid. And the radio broadcast of the 1976 Canada Cup. Ubiquitous media source. Loyal to Canada. And crucially, a son, husband, father and grandfather. If you’d created a model for the citizen of Canada of his times it was Ken.
He could be cranky and verbose, yes. His books often took issue with the state of the modern game. Concussions. The Trap. Excessive goalie pads. But his defining moment may have come in 1973 when, upset with Sam Pollock’s contract offer, he left the Montreal Canadiens to finish his law degree in Toronto. It’s important to note that his reputation at the time was a goalie carried by the Jean Beliveau super teams. Yet the Canadiens allowed 56 more goals in the 1973–74 season than they had the year before with Dryden. Plus they lost in the semifinals after winning the Cup the previous spring. Karma.
When he returned the Habs ripped off four consecutive Stanley Cups. Phil Esposito praised him as that “f’ing giraffe” who stole at least two Cups from the Bruins. He retired for good in 1979, and the Canadiens didn’t win another Cup till 1986. Which enhanced his reputation. His combination of tenacity, independence and integrity made him many fans. And launched a generation of goalies who broke the mould.

So his passing in the year that Boomers exercised their cultural privilege one last time is a fitting codicil to an era that held so much promise and has ended in a lost culture and renewed talk of separation in Quebec and Alberta. Many have emotional memories of Dryden, and social media has exploded with them on the news Friday of his death at 78.
For us, our quintessential Dryden moment came in 2001 at the NHL Draft. We were working for the Calgary Herald, he was an executive with the Maple Leafs. As we arrived at the Miami airport in a torrential rainstorm who was standing in the car rental lobby but the unmistakable No. 29? As fellow authors, we’d met many times, and we had quoted him so often we can’t count the times. So there was no fan-boy encounter.
This day he was a lost soul whose car rental had fallen through. Could we give him a ride to the media hotel? Sure. The company was welcome. As we rolled along though the pelting rain, searching for the right highway (this was pre-Waze) we talked about family and background. How were my kids? How was his wife now that he was hearing it from Maple Leafs fans?
Above the machine-gunning of the rain we then pivoted to hockey. He wanted to know what was going on with the Flames (they were mediocre at the time). And he wanted to talk about the state of trap hockey which was then choking the art of the game. Where was the beauty, the artistry in a league dumbed-down by clutch ‘n grab?
After chatting and squinting through the sheets of rain for 45 minutes we finally arrived at the hotel in Sunrise. As we walked into the lobby Ken thanked us for the ride and gave us $40 for gas. Media colleagues watching the scene were flabbergasted. Ken had a reputation as being frugal, and here he’d readily given me $40! U.S.! What could this mean? Did we get as scoop they’d have to chase. Ken blandly shooed them away, saying he had to check in.
We didn’t get a hot tip on a story. But we did get several gems to use in our next book Money Players, a finalist for the 2004 Canadian Business Book of the year. We meant to thank him for the material. Somehow the moment was never right. Now we won’t get that chance.
We might say the same for Canada. Somehow the moment was never right. Now we won’t get that chance. RIP Ken.
Bruce Dowbiggin @dowbboy is the editor of Not The Public Broadcaster A two-time winner of the Gemini Award as Canada’s top television sports broadcaster, his new book Deal With It: The Trades That Stunned The NHL And Changed hockey is now available on Amazon. Inexact Science: The Six Most Compelling Draft Years In NHL History, his previous book with his son Evan, was voted the seventh-best professional hockey book of all time by bookauthority.org . His 2004 book Money Players was voted sixth best on the same list, and is available via brucedowbigginbooks.ca.
-
espionage1 day ago
Inside Xi’s Fifth Column: How Beijing Uses Gangsters to Wage Political Warfare in Taiwan — and the West
-
Censorship Industrial Complex1 day ago
Decision expected soon in case that challenges Alberta’s “safe spaces” law
-
Education2 days ago
Our kids are struggling to read. Phonics is the easy fix
-
International2 days ago
Brazil sentences former President Bolsonaro to 27 years behind bars
-
COVID-191 day ago
Why FDA Was Right To Say No To COVID-19 Vaccines For Healthy Kids
-
Crime1 day ago
Transgender Roomate of Alleged Charlie Kirk Assassin Cooperating with Investigation
-
Business2 hours ago
Carney Admits Deficit Will Top $61.9 Billion, Unveils New Housing Bureaucracy
-
Energy1 day ago
Trump Admin Torpedoing Biden’s Oil And Gas Crackdown