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
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.
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."
Reduce, reuse, cycle