Editor’s Note: When powerful organizations promoting pseudo-science are threatened with exposure, they often react by suing their accusers. These groups have realized that the only option left to them when confronted with the lack of evidence supporting their wares is the suppression of the right of scientists and journalists to reasonable criticism. This is true in the case of Simon Singh, a British science writer who is being sued by the British Chiropractic Association for exposing the dangers of and lack of evidence supporting the efficacy of chiropractic healing techniques.
Source: Skepacabra
The case in question begins with the publishing of an article by Simon Singh in The Guardian, in which he points out the lack of evidence for many of the claims of chiropractors. The British Chiropractic Association, instead of providing The Guardian with the evidence they requested, has decided to sue Simon Singh for libel. The case has gained a lot of attention among skeptics, medical professionals and those concerned with the right to criticism of ideas that are not based on evidence. Hundreds of blogs and newspapers have written about the story, mostly in support of the science writer. Celebrities like Ricky Gervais have come out in support of Singh. Here is more news on the public reactions to the case.
The main strategy involved here is intimidation. The BCA wishes to scare all those who dare to question the evidence (or lack thereof) into cowering down. These are tactics often used very effectively by cults like Scientology. Narendra Nayak, in shining light on the failure of the psychic claims of the Dhyan Foundation and Yogi Ashwini, was threatened to be sued by the goondas in that organization. We proudly reported on that story. When Johann Hari’s story in The Independent sparked a controversy in India when it was republished by The Statesman, and the Editor and Publisher of that newspaper were arrested in Calcutta, we published that story and urged others to also reprint it. This is now an important aspect of websites that are critical of protective ideologies that use the muscle of the law rather than free and open discourse in order to silence science-based dissent. The point is to make these organizations aware that their tactics will only lead to an increase in the publicity that these stories get. The pseudo-science will be scrutinized by millions and evidence-based criticism of the pseudoscience will be promoted to all corners of cyberspace by the work of an army of diligent rationalists. Continuing in that tradition, I implore all readers who write blogs to publish the entire article (The original has been deleted but a cached version is available online here) in support of Simon Singh and in support of removing legislative intimidation in disputes involving the scientific analysis of ideas.
