oh, oops. that’s what i get for being lazy and not fact-checking myself. thanks for the fix, majeff.

I guess that is why tort reform blog Overlawyered covered the lawsuit two days before Pandagon did. Not sure how you missed that given that the blog post is linked in the post your linked to. But why let facts get in the way of a perfectly good smear?

Ahem: Stuart Pivar is a classic crackpot and his book is doodoo.
There, can I get sued, too?

I think it’s worth trying to be added to the case. I called Pivar a classic crackpot on my blog. I think everybody should do the same.

“Gould brow beat us with the fact that there is no ultimate goal of evolution,…”
If that’s what he taught…

Is thesis - as allegation or statement of belief or conviction.
Unprovable, undisprovable and lacking ancillary support.
[They tell me it’s really hard to prove a negative.]

The Anthropic Principle/Goldilox Universe people
(among whom I think I might like to be included - incorporates some good scientists)
believe and allege otherwise…and cite

The Goldilox Universe itself as AN evidence, if NOT proof at all.
And systems themselves, however self-organizing
(see:Chris Schoen), are neither argument
for or against Intent, Purpose or Prima Causa.

And so the ‘God’ thing gets back in the mix.

don’t know, but i do know that in britain the burden of proof in a libel case is on the DEFENDANT. meaning when david irving sued barbara lipstadt* for calling him a “holocaust denier”, she had to prove (a) that he denied that the holocaust happened and (b) that the holocaust did in fact happen. and she won, of course, which is both ridiculously “well i should hope so” and ridiculously awesome because the jerk got trounced so publicly and at such painful length. ha.

(who taught at my college, maybe that’s why i know about this — is this story widely known to the rest of y’all?)

Yes, Christopher Hitchens was a big defender of Irving.

Free trade organizations have been used to undermine environmental laws, etc. How come some news conglomerate hasn’t used GATT or something along those lines to overturn British libel laws as bad for inter-national trade in newspapers? Oh yeah … ‘cause most news conglomerates don’t actually care about reporting actual news …

As for the complaint, it is an unedited hunk of garbage not from a legal point of view (though certainly that too, in spades) but from a typographical, formatting and capitalization point of view. Look at the tabs, the headings. On and on. It doesn’t pass the 10th grade English class test.

It is said that for an attorney, by your pleadings you are known. That attorney will soon wish he had puked on the trial table in front of a camera rather than filed this hunk of steaming excretion. When I imagine my own name rather than his on such a document, I want to vomit.

i don’t know, but i do know that in britain the burden of proof in a libel case is on the DEFENDANT. meaning when david irving sued barbara lipstadt* for calling him a “holocaust denier”, she had to prove (a) that he denied that the holocaust happened and (b) that the holocaust did in fact happen. and she won, of course, which is both ridiculously “well i should hope so” and ridiculously awesome because the jerk got trounced so publicly and at such painful length. ha.

(who taught at my college, maybe that’s why i know about this — is this story widely known to the rest of y’all?)

First of all, it’s Deborah Lipstadt, not Barbara. Her book, “History on Trial” recounts the preparation for the lawsuit as well as what went on in the courtroom. It’s a very. very good book (one of those that had me up until 3:00am and until my vision became to blurry to read because it was so compelling).

Hmmm. Doing some thinking about adding a bit to one of my classes all of a sudden. A selection from this alongside Niewert’s “Strawberry Days” which I’m already teaching, which will both lead incredibly well into Gilroy’s “Against Race” which I’m also teaching again. Damn, I should not be adding things to syllabi.