Celebrity climate scientist Dr. Michael Mann is the co-author of an article published in the latest edition of the scientific journal BioScience. [emphasis, links added]
“The 2025 state of the climate report: a planet on the brink” concludes that the “climate crisis” is “a major driver of global instability.” “We are hurtling toward climate chaos. The planet’s vital signs are flashing red,” the authors of the paper declared.
While the paper’s conclusions are in line with Mann’s positions on climate change, the paper was funded in part by Roger Worthington.
While this funding is disclosed in the acknowledgments, it makes no mention that Worthington is an attorney representing the plaintiff in a major climate lawsuit in Oregon.
The BioScience article is not the only climate research that the attorney has been involved with.
In September, Chevron, one of the energy companies being targeted by the Oregon lawsuit, filed a motion to strike from the record two studies that the plaintiffs filed in support of their case.
Chevron argues the county failed to disclose that its lawyer may have influenced the papers. In a hearing on the motion, which was ultimately denied, the court nonetheless rebuked the plaintiffs for the lack of disclosure.
Chevron argues undisclosed involvement
Worthington is an asbestos trial lawyer and owner of the California-based law firm Worthington & Caron. He’s also lead counsel for Multnomah County, which is suing energy companies for $51 billion, alleging they contributed to a 2021 heat wave that caused over 100 deaths.
In September, Chevron filed a motion in the case, asking the Multnomah County, Oregon Circuit Court to disregard as evidence two climate studies published in the scientific journal Nature, which the county presented as peer-reviewed evidence. Worthington had undisclosed involvement in the studies, Chevron alleged.
One study published in May 2025 asserted that climate change contributed to 130 deaths and $160 billion in economic losses through wildfires. The article discloses that Worthington partially funded the study, but that article wasn’t submitted to the court.
Instead, one of the county’s experts relied on the paper, and Worthington’s connection to the research was not voluntarily disclosed by the expert, Chevron asserts.
The motion also points out that a draft version of “Carbon Majors and The Scientific Case for Climate Liability” appeared on Worthington & Caron’s website prior to publication.
The paper provides a legal framework for suing energy companies for climate change-related damages and claims that Chevron’s emissions are solely responsible for between $720 billion and $3.1 trillion in heat-related damages.
The county directly cited the article in court documents, and it was also cited by the county’s expert.
The prepublication study, the motion explains, contained a watermark stating “DO NOT DISTRIBUTE UNDER REVIEW.”
While the link to the study draft on the firm’s website is now broken, the draft remains on a web archive site. The fact Worthington had an advanced copy of the research, Chevron argues, suggests he may have been involved in the research.
Read rest at Just The News
