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?"
If someone can be sued for their opinions... man I'm going to make a TON of money from my mother-in-law!
And they said zombies weren't real!
Aha, I see the floodgates opening now:
1). Write ridiculously inaccurate book
2). Send it to a well-known, respected scientist for review
3). Wait for the scathing reviews to come in
4). Sue
5). Profit!
But, at the expense of respect. Hey, who needs respect when you have 15 million dollars?
John
And I'll proudly say it...anonymously.
They only require a little patience, a couple extra spider legs, and some super glue.
Well.. maybe. Or Maybe not. But Definitely not sort of.
And now people are afraid to write a bad review of the review!
"Little does he know, but there is no 'I' in 'Idiot'!"
The very real danger to the book's reviewer is that he may be placed in the position of defending rationality before a jury comprised of people who find it perfectly reasonable to symbolically eat the flesh of a cosmic Jewish zombie and telepathically implore him to save them from the consequences of a snake-deceived rib-woman's consumption of magic fruit.
Which is to say, in our rapidly medievalizing former republic, crazy nutbag plaintiffs are granted a decisive advantage.
"Skill shows through where genius wears thin." -Wittgenstein || Religion: uniting aviation and architecture.
General Relativity: Space-time tells matter where to go; Matter tells space-time what shape to be.
Slashdot readers hits the Amazon tag system; hilarity ensues...
delusional (11)
junk science (11)
crank (8)
fiction (8)
garbage (7)
crap (2)
crazy (2)
absent-minded (1)
art (1)
creative thinking (1)
dog crap (1)
fantast (1)
flim flam (1)
insane (1)
junk science crackpot crank garbage ball... (1)
litigious (1)
non-science (1)
I would prefer it if you not refer to Princeton in that manner.
What's a religion without nasty threats?
Philosophy?
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
i searched the review linked in the article and couldn't find the word "crackpot". i don't think it's libel at all. the only thing the reviewer does is completely trash this guy's "science" and calls it "nothing more than a bunch of pictures". after reading the review, it's obvious that this guy came up with some completely outrageous theories and threw them into a book and called it "science".
please me, have no regrets.
Reduce, reuse, cycle
Now I can sue /. for the unfavorable reviews.
Ah, Cthulhu, puting the FEAR into god-fearing for millions of years
-- Sig under construction...
> What's a religion without nasty threats?
The Church of England?
"Cake or death?"
But he didn't eat anyone's brain. He just flew to the heavens. That means... Jesus somehow had Jean Grey's powers.
Circumcision is child abuse.