Ed Brayton is a journalist, commentator and speaker. He is the co-founder and president of 
Some of you may remember the brouhaha caused by Stuart Pivar around these parts a couple years ago. Pivar wrote a breathtakingly bad book called Lifecode and sent it to PZ for him to review. So he reviewed it - and trashed praised it for its "flagrant crackpottery." A couple years later, Pivar, in a fit of pique, filed a libel suit against PZ and Seed Magazine. For $15 million. Because a scientist and specialist in the field addressed by his book gave the book a bad review.
You can still see the complaint here.
The legal complaint and the arguments it made was not only ridiculous, it was one of the most absurd and frivolous complaints I have ever read. It was so bad that it was withdrawn almost immediately. I criticized the hack attorney who wrote that piece of crap lawsuit, Michael Little, and he then threatened to sue me for criticizing him. Clearly these people are rather thin-skinned and highly irrational.
So here we are two years later and what does Pivar decide to do? Send his new book to PZ and ask him to review it. Seriously. Is this move kinda ballsy or is he just out of his freaking mind? I'll let you decide that.
Politics
Comments
Is this an XOR choice?
Posted by: Ferrous Patella | June 29, 2009 9:23 AM
Wow. Just wow...
Posted by: MikeMa | June 29, 2009 9:49 AM
Stuart Pivar: Insipid, Ballsy or Crazy?
All of the above.
Posted by: ??? | June 29, 2009 9:54 AM
Ed - I'd say desperate (for attention and/or money) & clinically insane.
Perhaps Mr Pivar expects completely different results this time, despite the initial conditions being exactly the same as his last experiment.
I wonder if mental health issues run in his family, so his early socialisation led him to this expectation, or maybe he's just congenitally batshit crazy? -DJ
Posted by: DingoJack | June 29, 2009 10:02 AM
Take an elongated toroid, put a half-twist in Mobius style, and that is his crazy.
But you have to applaud his optimism.
Posted by: Gingerbaker | June 29, 2009 10:16 AM
Posted by: Mu | June 29, 2009 10:31 AM
Well, given the number of religulous con-artists who have successfully used lawsuits to silence their critics, I'm guessing Pivar is having a crack at it, and maybe thinking PZ would want to "moderate" his criticisms in order to minimize possible future legal troubles. Even a frivolous lawsuit can cause serious inconvenience; so Pivar has at least some reason to suspect that he may be able to wear PZ down. Of course, he may need a better lawyer next time around...
Posted by: Raging Bee | June 29, 2009 10:45 AM
You know there is only one thing worse than being talked about.
Posted by: Richard Eis | June 29, 2009 11:17 AM
Posted by: Rieux | June 29, 2009 5:30 PM
Being laughed at.
Posted by: BobbyEarle | June 29, 2009 5:54 PM
Is this a poll? Crazy.
Posted by: Monado | June 29, 2009 6:02 PM
I'm chalking this up to the theory that even bad press is better than no press. There are people who will buy this book simply because the scientific "establishment" pans it; perhaps even enough to make the author a bit of coin.
Posted by: BruceH | June 29, 2009 7:21 PM
For the audience he seeks, getting negatively reviewed by Dr. Myers is probably a good thing.
Posted by: Julian | June 30, 2009 9:22 AM
My name came up in the dispute between PZ Myers and Dr. Vincent Fleury over PZ's review of Fleury's paper on embryogenesis by self-organization. In the past, my work has been questioned and criticized severely. The scientific criticisms are addressed in a new, expanded book ON THE ORIGIN OF FORM: Evolution by Self-Organization, an alternative to the natural selection paradigm distributed by Random House.
Please see www.ontheoriginofform.com
Does anyone care to attempt to refute the scientific basis of this theory rather than just call it crazy?
Stuart Pivar
Posted by: Stuart Pivar | July 3, 2009 12:02 PM
My Dear Mr Pivar -
There is no need for us to refute anything. Dr. Myers will easily point out the defects your 'theory', Isn't that the real reason for your request for his review?
It's hard to maintain the mantle of 'persecution' when nobody offers any kind of criticism of your work (or even notices your trifling efforts at science 'scholarship'). - DJ
PS: Crazy is colloquially defined as doing exactly the same clearly unsuccessful experiment again & again, in the expectation of differing results.
Posted by: DingoJack | July 3, 2009 12:46 PM