mondojohnson

From Sense About Science comes the latest news on the British Chiropractic Association’s libel suit against science writer Simon Singh. Today is a big deal; I will post news as I hear it:

“Simon Singh’s libel case with the British Chiropractic Association appears before the Court of Appeal in London [...] Tuesday 23rd February. His case will be heard by three of the most powerful legal figures in the UK, Lord Chief Justice Lord Judge, Master of the Rolls Lord Neuberger and Lord Justice Sedley and has been named one of the top ten cases to watch in 2010 by The Lawyer magazine.”

[I would like to point out that The Lawyer nicked my title -- "Simon Singh's Bogus Journey" -- which I first used in a post on May 15, 2009, and many times after. Frikkin' lawyers. Totally bogus. ]

The latest news on the Simon Singh libel case in the UK has arrived from Sense About Science, and it’s encouraging. Singh, who was sued for libel by the British Chiropractic Association for his use of the word “bogus”, has been granted an appeal by Lord Justice Laws in a tartly worded opinion. The ruling states that the Singh article was in the “public interest, with no suspicion of malice” and that there is “no question of good faith.”

Singh is cautiously optimistic but warns that he is not out of the woods yet. Read more at Sense About Science and indexoncensorship.org

Is someone at Hulu’s programming department following the libel case against Simon Singh?

I think maybe they are: from an infinite supply of aging but watchable movies, they chose Bill and Ted’s Bogus Journey as a highlighted feature this week.

The judge in the Singh case should watch the film. It accurately conveys a non-libelous connotation of the word “bogus” — i.e. something that is weak, lame, and totally non-non-non-excellent. As I mentioned in a previous post, I and my fellow veterans of American Dude culture circa 1991 did not use the word to mean “fraudulent; having a misleading appearance”. We very much meant it in the Bill and Ted sense. I doubt Simon Singh meant it in the dude sense, but isn’t the plasticity of the word’s meaning enough to dismiss the case?

I urge Simon Singh to use the “Bill and Ted” defense. “Dude — I mean your honor. I wasn’t saying the BCA is all like fraudulent and shit, I totally meant ‘non-tubular’.”

By the way, I think everyone should see the movie, especially for its parody of Bergman’s “Seventh Seal.”

The Jack of Kent blog maintains his vigil over the infuriating libel case the British Chiropractic Association has brought against science writer Simon Singh. Today he posted news of the BCA’s latest legal salvo, grandly titled “THIRD UPDATE ON BCA v SIMON SINGH” [scare caps in original].

In it, the BCA — after a pissy schoolyard intro — lists scholarly reference s to buttress their “we’re not bogus” stance. I’m sure they’ll be pored over thoroughly by the skeptical community, as Jack of Kent predicts… I look forward to that process. It promises to be an excellent scientific dogfight!

On June 4, Simon Singh announced that he will be appealing the pre-trial judgment in the libel case brought against him by those Sultans of Snakeoil, the British Chiropractic Association.

The Sense About Science web site has stepped up to serve as a main organizer of information about the case. It provides breaking news on the legal case and lets you know what you can do to support our man Simon (who is fighting the costly battle at his own expense). One of the things you can do right away is add your name to the list of supporters, which is now in the thousands. “Keep the Libel Laws Out of Science!” goes the slogan; you can do so by signing here!.