Slashdot Mirror
Science Blogger Sued for Unfavorable Book Review
tigerhawkvok writes "Recently, new author Stuart Privar provided Professor PZ Meyers of Pharyngula a copy of his book, Lifecode, for review. Over the course of the review itself and a few follow-ups, it became evident that the content was nonsense (including, among other things, ten-legged spiders and other phenomena strongly at odds with developmental biology). However, the common threat of lawsuits finally became a reality, and now Privar is suing Myers for $15 million. Can calling someone a 'classic crackpot' in the face of such incorrect data have any chance at making it to court, or even winning the suit?"
When fiction is being tought in schools as a "valid theory"? No doubt about it.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
As it turns out, I'm strictly an atheist. I'm just not so insecure in my beliefs that I need to lash out at everybody who isn't, or who I imagine isn't.
Just because someone publishes something that is wrong, doesn't mean you're allowed to publish statements that they're a crackpot. It's libel.
It doesn't serve the public interest to make general statements about this person. All it does is damage their reputation. That's libel.
He might be a brilliant businessman, rational, good at math, but took a leap of intuition when it comes to biology. One book of speculative pseudo-science doesn't mean he's a crackpot, yet now his name is attached to that label in the minds of millions who will never read his book.
The guy who wrote the review looks pretty guilty to me.
-1 Uncomfortable Truth
If you read much of PZ Meyers, you'll see a kettle/pot relationship here.