Skip to main content

Message from Simon Singh

I am passing on this message from Singh - please sign statement of support.

1. Court of Appeal and Campaign Launch

I am glad to say that on Monday I will apply to the Court of Appeal in an attempt to overturn the recent negative ruling on meaning in my libel case with the British Chiropractic Association.

Also, Sense About Science have launched a campaign linked to my libel case and focussing on the need to overhaul the English libel system, which is deeply flawed and which therefore has a chilling effect on journalism.

The campaign has issued a statement of support, which has already been signed by an incredible list of people, including James Randi, Richard Dawkins, Ricky Gervais, Sir Martin Rees, Penn & Teller, Stephen Fry, Martin Amis and Steve Jones. It would be terrific if you would also sign up to the statement and (better still) encourage others to sign up. It is conceivable that this campaign could help reform the English libel laws (which unfortunately affect overseas journalists too). Please help us move closer to having a free press.

You can find the statement and sign up at:
http://www.senseaboutscience.org.uk/libelcampaign


2. Fighting Fund

I have had many kind and generous offers of financial help, but at the moment I am able to fund my own legal costs. However, if you would like to help, then please make a donation to Sense About Science, who will need funding to maintain what could be a long battle to reform the libel laws. You can find out how to donate at:
http://www.senseaboutscience.org.uk/index.php/site/project/336


3. Cheltenham and Oxford

I will be speaking at the Cheltenham Science Festival on Saturday 6 June and at Oxford Skeptics in the Pub on Monday. More information at:
http://www.simonsingh.net/Simon_Lectures.php


And finally, a massive thanks to everyone who has been so supportive over the last month. You have genuinely played a crucial role in my decision to go to the Court of Appeal.

Cheerio,
Simon.

Ps. You can find plenty of press coverage about the libel case at the Sense About Science website, but some highlights include:
http://www.channel4.com/news/articles/uk/ouch+dr+singh+hits+back/3194057
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wc77Y-XBlj0
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-1190863/Stars-writer-sues-chiropractors-saying-unproven-treatment-bogus.html
http://www.independentco.uk/news/science/silenced-the-writer-who-dared-to-say-chiropractice-is-bogus-1696408.html
http://jackofkent.blogspot.com/

PPs. If you need to email me, then please do not reply to this address, as
your email will not reach me. Please go via the website
http://www.simonsingh.net and click the contact button. It takes me ages to
answer emails, as I am struggling to keep up with my correspondence, so
please be patient.

PPPs. To unsubscribe, please send a blank email to newsletter-unsubscribe@simonsingh.net. For further help with subscribing and unsubscribing, please visit http://www.simonsingh.net/Sign-up.html

Comments

The Atheist Missionary said…
Thank-you for posting this and please keep us posted on the outcome of the appeal.
June 6, 2009 at 12:49 PM
Paul P. Mealing said…
Thanks Stephen,

I've already signed the partition as I have a link via Facebook.

Regards, Paul.
June 7, 2009 at 1:32 AM
Paul P. Mealing said…
BTW, there was an article in New Scientist, 30 May 2009, by Singh's co-author, Edzard Ernst.

Regards, Paul.
June 7, 2009 at 2:36 AM
southern california lemon law said…
Good job man. I am going to register and join the partition very soon. See you there....
June 11, 2009 at 9:04 AM
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

EVIDENCE, MIRACLES AND THE EXISTENCE OF JESUS

(Published in Faith and Philosophy 2011. Volume 28, Issue 2, April 2011. Stephen Law. Pages 129-151) EVIDENCE, MIRACLES AND THE EXISTENCE OF JESUS Stephen Law Abstract The vast majority of Biblical historians believe there is evidence sufficient to place Jesus’ existence beyond reasonable doubt. Many believe the New Testament documents alone suffice firmly to establish Jesus as an actual, historical figure. I question these views. In particular, I argue (i) that the three most popular criteria by which various non-miraculous New Testament claims made about Jesus are supposedly corroborated are not sufficient, either singly or jointly, to place his existence beyond reasonable doubt, and (ii) that a prima facie plausible principle concerning how evidence should be assessed – a principle I call the contamination principle – entails that, given the large proportion of uncorroborated miracle claims made about Jesus in the New Testament documents, we should, in the absence of indepen...
159 comments
Read more

The Evil God Challenge and the "classical" theist's response

On another blog, FideCogitActio, some theists of a "classical" stripe (that's to say, like Brian Davies, Edward Feser) are criticisng the Evil God Challenge (or I suppose, trying to show how it can be met, or sidestepped). The main post includes this: In book I, chapter 39 , Aquinas argues that “there cannot be evil in God” (in Deo non potest esse malum). Atheists like Law must face the fact that, if the words are to retain any sense, “God” simply cannot be “evil”. As my comments in the thread at Feser’s blog aimed to show, despite how much he mocks “the privation theory of evil,” Law himself cannot escape its logic: his entire argument requires that the world ought to appear less evil if it is to be taken as evidence of a good God. Even though he spurns the idea that evil is a privation of good, his account of an evil world is parasitic on a good ideal; this is no surprise, though, since all evil is parasitic on good ( SCG I, 11 ). Based on the conclusions of se...
446 comments
Read more

Sye show continues

I was sent a link to this , for those interested in the never ending saga of Sye TenBruggencate and his "proof" of the existence of God. Hit "sinner ministries' proof of the existence of god" link below or on side bar for 30+ earlier posts on this topic that I wrote during an extended interchange with him last summer (check the literally many hundreds of comments attached to these posts if you really want to get into how Sye thinks and argues). Sye's amazing intial "proof" is available here . PS. For those interested, my own "presuppositional" proof, parodying Sye's proof by his principle "the impossibility of the contrary" (which turns out to be the key to Sye's proof) is: My claim: Sye's mind is addled and his thinking unreliable because he was hit on the head by a rock. Prove this is false, Sye. Try to, and I will say - "But your "proof" presupposes your mind is not addled and you can recognise a pr...
250 comments
Read more