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?"

8 of 588 comments (clear)

  1. I see dollar signs by Sierpinski · · Score: 5, Funny

    If someone can be sued for their opinions... man I'm going to make a TON of money from my mother-in-law!

  2. new business plan by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    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?

  3. Bestest. Review. EVAR. by plover · · Score: 5, Funny
    I love this quote:

    The doodles in this book bear absolutely no relationship to anything that goes on in real organisms, but after staring at them for a while, I realized what this book is actually about.

    This book is a description of the development and evolution of balloon animals.

    It's that bad. This is a book suitable only for use at clown colleges, and even there, I suspect the clowns would tell us that it is impractical, nonsensical, and has no utility in their craft.

    --
    John
  4. Re:When Wealthy Christians and Crackpots Attack! by ColonelPanic · · Score: 5, Funny

    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.
  5. Re:Bestest. Review. EVAR. by Andrewkov · · Score: 5, Funny
    It's that bad. This is a book suitable only for use at clown colleges

    I would prefer it if you not refer to Princeton in that manner.

  6. Re:When Wealthy Christians and Crackpots Attack! by gordo3000 · · Score: 5, Funny

    What's a religion without nasty threats?

    Philosophy?

  7. Re:When Wealthy Christians and Crackpots Attack! by Hognoxious · · Score: 5, Funny

    The guy who wrote the review looks pretty guilty to me.
    That's because you're a crackpot too.
    --
    Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
  8. Vulgar Abuse by giafly · · Score: 5, Funny

    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.
    ShieldW0lf, you're a fucking retard! Vulgar abuse is not defamatory. Thus you can't win a libel suit against me for calling you a fucking retard and the plaintiff in this case probably shouldn't sue for being called a crackpot.
    --
    Reduce, reuse, cycle