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?"
I agree with your sentiment, but I deplore your methods.
I vaguely recall the first really popular IDE for DOS machines was Turbo Pascal written by someone named like Philip Khan. Same dude?
sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
What does this have to do with the price of opium in Tibet aka the book review.
Why wasn't that guy in the rightmost line of traffic anyway?
Not if we attach frickin' laser beams to their heads! :-)
(sorry, couldn't resist)
[5 STARS] It's well accepted in the scientific community that the coolest theory is usually the correct one. Evolution for example is quite lame, with its long slow processes and lack of nifty illustrations. Evolution is also hampered by its insistence on verifiable well tested data. What's more boring then sitting in a darkened lab looking through a microscope. It is the definition of geeky. Lifecode is none of those things. Pivar begins with a cool theory, that our bodies are formed by mechanical process not genetic information, and then creates data to support it. Ask yourself what shows more intelligence finding data in the real world (easy) or actually creating it yourself (hard). He also includes amazing comics of how a perfect cone is molded into a skull. Now, scientists might argue that we see none of this when we actually look at developing embryos. That's not the point. They are making the critical error of putting data before theory. Pivar is smart enough to realize the absurdity of that. If you want well tested established theories look elsewhere. If you want a theory that is cool and makes you feel good look here. This book is must for all Creationists, home schoolers, and those few brave folks who can reject plain evidence in favor of amazing fancy.
An old-timer with old-timey ideas.
Hey, I liked Future Cop. That was a pretty good game.
That an authoritarian President's war would serve to reduce his voting base through attrition?
Blar.
"I've got to laugh at posts like this that provide little insight, lots of insults,"
Hey look, you just described the blogger's review. Why is it ok for him, but you have a problem when other's do it? Oh, you're a hypocrite, I see now.
"Actually, scientific method has been agreed upon for hundreds of years."
YAY! Nothing at all to do with writing about science though, totally has to do with conducting experiments. Sucks that you're wrong when you're so vehement about it, but you're still wrong.
"If you don't adhere to scientific method"
Then you didn't adhere to scientific method, nothing more. The results are in no way dependent on the method used to get them, but you apparently aren't smart enough to see that. Lying about what is "likely" makes it pretty clear you're not interested in accuracy, but in furthering your opinion.
"And you could do with a bit of maturity training."
No wonder you agree with the blogger, when confronted by arguments you can't refute, you run to insults. I think you could do with a bit of logic training, as you've shown a decided inability to apply it correctly.
By the way, you said this
"Pot, meet kettle."
I'd avoid giving advice about maturity in light of that, but then again I'm smarter than you, so you probably won't listen.