1. Comment #419473 by nother person on September 27, 2009 at 4:51 pm

Woot! Hooray! Yea! Well done! Hear! Hear! Well said!

Other Comments by nother person

2. Comment #419517 by kev_s on September 27, 2009 at 6:23 pm

Was the amendment supported?
EDIT: To answer my own question ... this from www.senseaboutscience.org.uk:
"The Liberal Democrats voted overwhelmingly in favour of libel law reform at their party conference on Sunday 20th September 2009. This is a great step forward in recognising that the chilling, stultifying effect of the English libel laws - on scientific debates and other important public discussions - has become dangerous and intolerable. There is still much more to do."

Other Comments by kev_s

3. Comment #419604 by frederickfarrell on September 28, 2009 at 12:02 am

Well done Richard! A fantastic speech.

Other Comments by frederickfarrell

4. Comment #419646 by Clairebear on September 28, 2009 at 5:06 am

Fantastic speech. I too vote Lib Dem - they're the only party that haven't messed us up, probably because they haven't been in yet.

Other Comments by Clairebear

5. Comment #419658 by thomas guihen on September 28, 2009 at 6:33 am

Claire - I have as well although I'm not a member; I've also supported Labour and Respect. They unfortunately probably will never get in, more's the pity. Richard said that he has voted for them in every General Election since they formed, so I am surprised that he's not a member. I agree with him on keeping the law out of science. He is spot on. I honestly don't know enough about homeopathy to dismiss it out of hand like he does. I know however that acupuncture has been used for over 2,000 years, primarily by the Chinese, so it may have some validity.

Other Comments by thomas guihen

6. Comment #419675 by A on September 28, 2009 at 8:01 am

@ thomas guihen

That acupuncture has been used for over 2,000 does not add to it's credibility.

Antiquity does not equal veracity.

Antiquity equals antiquity.

People often (mistakenly) see something of great age as having a value beyond simply being old - that is all acupuncture is - an old science - very old, outdated, replaced by better (more reliable and proven) science.

A simple review of the available test data will always beat ruminations over it's great historicity.

Other Comments by A

7. Comment #419677 by frederickfarrell on September 28, 2009 at 8:20 am

From everything I've read acupuncture is pure placebo, and perhaps being honest about that would diminish it's placebo effects. I have met at least three people who strongly hold that it has major benefits in relieving their back pain but I've read nothing that can prove any visible medical effect other than that which can be achieved by simply pretending to insert the needles in controlled trials.

It's worth reading up on though, as the myth of its effectiveness is very far reaching and deserves some strong counter-arguments. That said, I'm getting tired of everyone treating me like some kind of spoil-sport for busting their illusions. If ignorance is bliss I want none of it.

Other Comments by frederickfarrell

8. Comment #419695 by Fuller on September 28, 2009 at 10:33 am

thomas guihen: I can think of something else that has been practised for 2000 years and has no validity...

Watch 'The Enemies of Reason'. You can see the whole thing on google video.

Other Comments by Fuller

9. Comment #419714 by Humanist Wikitopian on September 28, 2009 at 1:06 pm

Bravo Richard!

Although one recent report that did worry/surprise me greatly was this:

"More than one third of British people have not heard of the Liberal Democrat leader Nick Clegg, a poll conducted for BBC Newsnight suggests.

The 1,056 UK adults canvassed were asked for their opinion of him.

Thirty six percent had a favourable view of Mr Clegg, but an equal number said they had never heard of him."

From: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/newsnight/8267582.stm

Political apathy and general public ignorance of current affairs has always been a "pet peeve" of mine though. (Does nobody actually watch the news anymore?!)

Comment #419658 by thomas guihen:
I honestly don't know enough about homeopathy to dismiss it out of hand like he does.

Homeopathy = Expensive water sold as a bogus cure for any and all ailments.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homeopathy

Other Comments by Humanist Wikitopian

10. Comment #419729 by thomas guihen on September 28, 2009 at 2:21 pm

Humanist - I share your concern regarding current affairs. I would like to know more about the demographic of the poll. It does seem rather a small figure to extrapolate from concerning the views of the nation which is why one should be wary of it. Nonetheless we live in a country in which the appeal is usually to the lowest common denominator. Witness the number of so-called reality television programmes we have. The biggest selling daily and Sunday newspapers are both red-tops. You can be viewed with suspicion if you are seen with a book unless you happen to be middle-class. Victoria Beckham once said that she never reads. It was almost a brag. People can't be bothered to vote but they will text Big Brother to decide who they want evicted from the house - thank God it's not on any more! - and so on. I wouldn't go so far as to suggest causation but there definitely is a very strong correlation between these factors and the general political ignorance you referred to.

Other Comments by thomas guihen

11. Comment #419739 by OlavRokne on September 28, 2009 at 3:38 pm

Brilliant. This is my favourite thing I've listened to on this site, and I've enjoyed a lot of the content on this website.

Other Comments by OlavRokne

12. Comment #419757 by SaintStephen on September 28, 2009 at 5:18 pm

"Do we really want discussions on matters of science, evidence, and medicine, and indeed any area of public interest, to be conducted in an atmosphere of fear and uncertainty?"

No.

Other Comments by SaintStephen

13. Comment #420083 by Follow Peter Egan on September 29, 2009 at 8:28 pm

Bravo Richard.

Other Comments by Follow Peter Egan

14. Comment #420258 by Bluff_King_Hal on September 30, 2009 at 3:34 am

Well said Dawks!

Thankyou for taking the time to speak in support of this policy. It is of course unfortunate that the Lib Dems are unlikely to have the political clout to produce this change, but an important issue has been highlighted.

Other Comments by Bluff_King_Hal

15. Comment #421890 by geowilt on October 5, 2009 at 9:54 pm

Brilliant speach by Richard Dawkins , why isn't someone asking who benefits from these libel laws other than the solicitors/barristors.

Other Comments by geowilt

16. Comment #421917 by lt_zippy2 on October 5, 2009 at 11:32 pm

I have to admit from hearing him address political matters I guessed he voted Lib Dem, so this was really no surprise!

I'm an ex-Labour party member who has voted Lib Dem since 2001! Oh the disillusionment!

Other Comments by lt_zippy2

17. Comment #421924 by phil rimmer on October 5, 2009 at 11:48 pm

Superb stuff. I wish I'd known about this during the Maher award rumble.

Other Comments by phil rimmer

18. Comment #422044 by !_DrLight on October 6, 2009 at 2:55 pm

Well as a "card carrying" believer in the scientific method I have for years followed the adage: "Spoil your ballot paper - Vote Liberal". Which I guess places me firmly in a time rame of pre Liberal Democratic party.

But a brilliant and moving speech, a pity that it won't reach the ears of those it most needs to - the masses in the street who think that the Daily Mirror, Express and Sun are NEWS papers

Other Comments by !_DrLight