Book Description
This latest installment in the P.I.G. series provides a provocative, entertaining, and well-documented expose of some of the most shamelessly politicized pseudo-science we are likely to see in our relatively cool lifetimes.
Customer Reviews:
Trolls.......2007-10-12
This book is not only false, but completely irresponsible. The people who wrote this book are probably just a bunch of trolls who are in a tizzy because they don't want to give up their SUV's or their money they are earning from oil.
Good Book.......2007-10-01
It's about time someone brought to light the other side of the story. A must read for liberals.
Exceedingly one-sided attempt to suggest warming is beneficial and/or not man-made.......2007-09-23
The issue of global warming has long been in the news. From the perspective of Australia the issue is critical, as rainfall in my home city of Melbourne has declined by forty percent in the past eleven years. Such a decline is totally unparalleled in the 150 years of instrumental record.
At the same time, the northwest of Australia has seen dramatic increases in rainfall ever since the late 1960s, so much so that seven of its eight wettest years (since 1885) have occurred since 1995.
In this context, even though able usually to listen to anybody (actually, I generally dislike moderate views because they tend to be wishy-washy) it is not possible for me to take most of the claims made by Horner seriously.
Horner's contention, basically, is that global warming is either not man-made or will in the long-term benefit human society. As to the first point, he greatly exaggerates the proportion of greenhouse gases that is naturally occurring. For instance, my prior knowledge of science tell me that it impossible that more than minute quantities (like, say, a few grams per year) of sulfur hexafluoride or other exceedingly potent fluorine-containing greenhouse gases could be naturally produced each year. Because there is no natural sink for them, natural production of fluorine-containing greenhouse gases in the quantities asserted by Horner would inevitably turn the Earth into an inferno with temperatures hot enough, say, to melt copper. He also understates the proportion of other greenhouse gases that are man-made, notably carbon dioxide where emissions from combustion are far greater than those from biological decay, fires, volcanoes and oceanic release.
Horner's viewpoints about the extent and effects of global warming are also very poorly done. For instance, he suggests that increases in global temperatures have been due to closures of stations in the Russian Arctic. As a person with knowledge of how mean temperatures for an area are calculated, I know well that is unlikely unless every single station in Arctic Russia was closed (which is not what he says): the few that remain would be always given greater weight owing to the large areas they represent and the closures would not affect the average. Although he rightly asserts that the Southern Hemisphere is warming much less than the Northern, my knowledge of Australian climatology suggests this is almost certainly due to the large increases in rainfall that have occurred not only over pastoral areas of Western Australia but also in similar latitudes of South America. Large increases in rainfall naturally lead to reduced temperatures because it has become much cloudier. For example, 2000, whilst the fifth warmest year on record globally, was one of the coolest on record in pastoral areas of Western Australia owing to general record-breaking annual rainfall. In areas of Australia that have dried out, there has been as much warming as in the Northern Hemisphere.
Horners' idea about the question of "global cooling" is similarly weak. The issue rose form the fact that it was thought upon studying previous glacial-interglacial cycles where 10,000 years of interglacial were followed by 90,000 years of glacial that we were near the end of the Holocene and that the next ice age was due to begin soon. Recent data show that we are moving towards an era of longer - but cooler - interglacials (and relatively shorter, less cold glacial periods).
Horner's other chief thesis is that warming always benefits civilisations. He cites the effects of the Medieval Warm Period upon European civilisation as an example - for instance the settlement of Greenland by the Norse and its ending with cooling and the Little Ice Age. However, there is little evidence that this rule holds in hotter and more fragile environments. For instance, the Hohokam of Arizona declined after reaching a peak in the eighth century just before the Medieval Warm Period, and some Mesoamerican societies also declined from the ninth century, apparently due to climate change. In any case, because many areas that are major agricultural regions today were not farmed in the Middle Ages, comparisons are not possible.
Horner's viewpoint that reducing greenhouse emissions would be immensely costly is also impossible to accept. Government welfare to polluting corporations is extremely large, as are budgets for building utterly unnecessary freeways. These could easily be completely redirected to supporting renewable energy and public transit at great benefit to everybody except some exceedingly powerful vested interests in car and fossil fuel corporations. Although Horner is actually right in saying the US' per capita emissions show greater decline than Europe's, the difference is not significant and if it reflects anything at all, it is probably the greater willingness of Americans to accept less comfortable lifestyles.
The way in which Horner accepts only the evidence that suits his viewpoints is really the worst kind of science you will ever see. It recurs time and time against throughout this book and for this reason alone I would not recommend "The Politically Incorrect Guide to Global Warming".
What the media won't tell you about this farce called globla warming.......2007-09-22
This book covers all the stuff you need to know to become informed about so called global warming. Yes the climate does change but it is cyclic not due to man made causes!!!! The powers that be that worship this religion are only in it to pick your pockets and gain power!!!
It is a fallacy that man is causing this to the degree that the greens and the great Goreacle want you to believe.
Read this and become informed to put to rest the misinformation that they want you to believe.
Politically Incorrect Guide to Global Warming is Well Written.......2007-09-22
The Politically Incorrect Guide to Global Warming answers the unscientific and alarmist notions by Al Gore and the environmentalists. The book proposes reasoned thought instead of arm-waving and rhetoric. It proposes that no science is "settled" and everything is still open to question and should be studied in order to improve the human condition. The human condition can be improved by studying the previous history of the planet,finding out how the environment changed and adapted through time and various challenges. Tne human condition cannot be improved by adopting some apocalyptic measures thought out at 2 A.M. and not reexamined in the light of day.
Book Description
Islam expert Robert Spencer reveals Islam's ongoing, unshakable quest for global conquest and why the West today faces the same threat as the Crusaders did--and what we can learn from their experience.
Customer Reviews:
Shows common myths wrong but too many omissions and quite a bit of ranting.......2007-10-06
Following upon the runaway success of its guide to American history, Regnery Publishing decided to follow it with a guide to Islam, which fitted in with the paranoia about jihad taking over the West at the time.
"The Politically Incorrect Guide to Islam (and the Crusades)" covers much the same territory as the author's former book Islam Unveiled. Having read about Muslims' own viewpoints of Islam through investigating the fatwa against Salman Rushdie, Spencer both in Islam Unveiled and this book provides a clear corrective to people who seemed reasonable people when I first read them but are in fact apologists for Islam. His illustration of the amount of violence in the Qur'an is in fact something I knew of very well from reading my father's copy as a child, but Spencer's illustration of how Muslim theologians actually regard the most violent verses as overturning less violent ones is something quite new (to me) and shocking.
His overview of the Crusades is essentially a repeat of Islam Unveiled, though for those who read other aspects of the period's history it seems strangely incomplete and not looking at other events of the time like Christianisation of northern Europe. There is also a lot of repetitive ranting about how Muslim rulers' apparent tolerance of other religions resulted from them relaxing Sharia law: Spencer makes no effort to explain why they relaxed it or failed to follow it (or even why they ended such practices). In a similar vein is his explanation of how Islam wiped out Zoroastrianism and Nestorian Christianity consequent upon its eastward spread. This may be a good explanation; however, there are two glaring omissions in this context.
The first is the absence of a chapter or two on the response of Hindu and Buddhist Asia to the spread of Islam. Given Spencer's statement that Hindu India is the only nation apart from the West that has successfully resisted jihad, this is surprising. The second is a discussion to the spread of Islam in southeast Asia between the fifteenth and seventeenth centuries. Given that Islam in southeast Asia is often quoted (despite the terrorism in Indonesia today) by many who deny that Islam is by nature intolerant and violent, this omission is all the more serious. Spencer also does consider that modernisation is already seriously weakening traditions in most Muslim nations today, so that some of his claims about the Islamic future of the West come off as too familiar.
All in all, "The Politically Incorrect Guide to Islam (and the Crusades)" does offer some remarkably obvious correctives to myths about Islam and the Qur'an, as well as some almost-terrifying revelations about Islam and its founder. Its tone is at times very ranty, however, and there are a number of facets of Islamic history that the book omits to mention.
Hate some more people...thats all we need.......2007-09-28
This book reinforces the medias hold on our society...once you have been fed something for so long (in this case that Islam is bad) it is quite easy to belief when people start picking apart pieces...i embraced Islam 1 1/2 years ago and it was the best decision i have ever made...i do not prescribe to some of the most socially damaging behaviours of our time drinking/premarital sex/overindulgence in material possessions/environemenatl damage....Islam has put all these things in perspective for me and has given me a foundation and guidance as to how to achieve these things.....
I love all people and respect their beliefs and literature like this CREATES FURTHER DISTANCE BETWEEN HUMANKIND......like we need anymore hate and discrimination....
PIG Islam.......2007-09-24
Not as good as I thought it would be. Does not provide much insight, but makes you want to learn more.
OH MY GOD!.......2007-09-21
A MUST READ for every person living in Western Civilization! This book exposes this 'religion' as the expansionist political movement it is and the underground quiet revolution that is taking place using our legal system, our schools, our media, our gullibility and the mathematical inevitabilty of population demographics to impose their will on our society.
Even right thinking Muslims who practice only the spiritual and moral precepts by which they live their lives I doubt know the underlying and nefarious principles of Islam. And if they do shame on them for not publicly rejecting them.
Eye opening reading. Spend the money to buy this book. The more you know about Islam will allow you see through the politically correct smokescreen that the Islamist apologists (CAIR), our media and our government is putting forth. Our civilization and the future of your grandchildren are at stake. Buy it but more importantly read it cover to cover and then pass it on to a neighbor or friend.
Informative.......2007-09-18
A good read that's well argued. To anyone presenting Islam as peaceful, this book cross references the koran frequently and to good effect. Also explains a bit of history prior to the crusades that is commonly omitted from contemporary debate.
Book Description
Participating in the economy is a part of everyday life, yet much of what is commonly accepted as economic fact is wrong. Keynesian schoolteachers and the liberal media have filled the world with politically correct errors that myth-busting professor Robert Murphy sets straight. Murphy explains hot topics like outsourcing (why it's good for Americans) and zoning restrictions (why they're not). Just like the other books in the P.I.G. series, The Politically Incorrect GuideT to Capitalism pulls no punches.
Customer Reviews:
Good overview of arguments for capitalism........2007-10-06
I have avoided the P.I.G. series, not knowing if they were going to be any good. But I have been trying to learn something about economics, and have read a variety of book on the subject over the past three years. This book is a very good summary of the arguements for capitalism. Whether or not you disagree with a laissez-faire approach this book lays out the ideas in a straightforward manner, and without too much demagoguery (there is a little, but not so much that it becomes the focus of the book). Overall, a book that does it's job well.
5 stars for beginners; 4 stars for libertarian philosophes.......2007-09-27
This book is stridently, unabashedly, and wholeheartedly 100% pro-capitalist in the purest, most positive sense of the word. Unlike other Politically Incorrect Guides, the orientation of this book is not conservative, but rather libertarian. There is some pandering to the Conservative Book Club audience, with lots of digs at "liberals," and deafening silence on the issues of immigration and war (though a few pro-immigration, anti-war hints are dropped if you're careful to pay attention). All in all, this book would be great for liberals and conservatives alike who are trending libertarian and/or who know very little about economics or capitalist philosophy. For longtime libertarians, however, this gets only 4 stars as a wonderful affirmation of our already held beliefs. One thing this book did do for me, however, is finally turn me against my last bastion of big-government activism, anti-discrimination laws -- which even conservatives have come to embrace. Libertarianism is the only anti-racist creed, and yet it recognizes that all the government can morally do is to not practice racism -- it cannot enforce laws against its practice on a private level.
Poor sourcing and dubious claims.......2007-09-17
In The Politically Incorrect Guide to Capitalism, Robert P. Murphy aims to show that the free market is the most efficient and effective way of organising things. He argues that government regulation causes inefficiency to the point that it can never be justified, even in conditions where it is asked for by most governments.
The book does contain a number of very interesting points. Some include about how the New Deal failed to cure the Depression, or about how the free market would end slavery and child labour naturally.
However, these good points are offset by too many dubious claims, for instance about how a privatised road market would end congestion. Whilst there would be more efficient use of labour in road building, there is likely to be a major problem here. If (as I imagine) vehicle companies took over ownership of roads (which Murphy never says impossible or even improbable). One would obtain a system where profit gives unparalleled incentive to create more traffic. This would no doubt mean completely uncalled-for roads get built and oher more efficient transport is outcompeted. Similarly, when discussing endangered species he does not realise that many dealer in (say) rhino horn have a stake in ensuring rhinos become extinct. Also, many endangered species are of no potential commercial value.
Although Murphy likewise says capitalism is essential to a free society, he fails to clearly define this - even implicity saying the right to strike is not a basic freedom.
The extremely poor sourcing - worse even than in the appalling Guide to Global Warming - makes this book very dubious. There are certainly better economics books out there for those who need them.
This book is more political or social science than economic science.......2007-08-25
This book is more political or social science than economic science. The author Rush Limbaugh school of economics not a university. As none of this is sound economics. More just some ramble on politics.
Good but not great.......2007-08-24
This is a good primer on capitalism and I'm inclined to believe the message of this book. Unfortunately at times it lacks footnotes and sources to back up some of its claims. Therefore it can seem more like an exercise in pamphleteering than a serious arguement. Many of the author's claims will require a leap of faith. They'll appeal to true believers, but they may not convince skeptics. Nevertheless, it should be read to get a basic understanding of the benefits of capitalism.
Amazon.com
Claiming that most textbooks and popular history books were written by biased left-wing writers and scholars, historian Thomas Woods offers this guide as an alternative to "the stale and predictable platitudes of mainstream texts." Covering the colonial era through the Clinton administration, Woods seeks to debunk some persistent myths about American history. For instance, he writes, the Puritans were not racists intent on stealing the Indians' lands, the Founding Fathers were not revolutionaries but conservatives in the true sense of the word, the American War Between the States (to even call it a civil war is inaccurate, Woods says) was not principally about slavery, Abraham Lincoln was no friend to the slaves, and FDR's New Deal policies actually made the Depression worse. He also covers a wide range of constitutional interpretations over the years, particularly regarding the First, Second, Ninth, and Tenth amendments, and continually makes the point that states' rights have been unlawfully trampled upon by the federal government since the early days of the republic. Though its title is more deliberately provocative than accurate, Woods' attack on what he sees as rampant liberal revisionism over the past 25 years proves to be an interesting platform for a book. He's as biased as those he rails against, of course, but he does provoke thought in an entertaining way even if he sometimes tries to pass off opinion as hard facts.
This quick and enjoyable read is packed with unfamiliar quotes, informative sidebars, iconoclastic viewpoints, and a list of books "you're not supposed to read." It is not a comprehensive or detailed study, but that is not its aim; instead, it offers ideas for further research and a challenge to readers to dig deeper and analyze some basic assumptions about American history--a worthy goal that Woods manages to reach. --Shawn Carkonen
Book Description
Almost everything you know about American history is wrong, because most textbooks and popular history books are written by left-wing academic historians who treat their biases as fact. But fear not, Professor Thomas Woods has written the perfect antidote. This delightful book--funny and inviting, but factually sound--shatters the myths about American history and separates fact from fiction.
Customer Reviews:
A malcontent with a bone to pick.......2007-09-27
Woods' screed reads like the words of a guest who you would kick out of your dinner party before the salad is finished - cherry-picked hooey from a serial contrarian using massive leaps in assumption to reach flimsy conclusions. If you've got tons of time to waste, by all means, give this a read. If you value your time, however...
Fascinating , Infuriating, Thought-Provoking View of American History.......2007-09-24
Thomas Woods' main point is that the United States has drifted far from its constitutional moorings. The federal government has gotten involved with things that realy belong under the jurisdiction of the state governments.
Another underlying theme is that history has been explained to us through the years from a left wing perspective. Woods surveys American history from the time of the Pilgrims to the year 2000. He contends that the 1st amendment was only meant to restrict Congress from making laws depriving us of our freedoms of speech, religion and the press, and that it shouldn't be used to tell state governments that they can't allow prayer in schools.
Also, Woods believes that our federal government has ignored the 10th amendment, which reserves powers and privileges to the states that are not expressly given to the federal government.
Woods also points out that Abraham Lincoln was no friend of the slaves, and that he was trying to preserve the union (even though this ignored the states' right to secede if they wished).
The author also shows that the presidents of the United States acquired more and more powers for themselves as the years went on. He portrays FDR as a conniving president who worked hard behind the scenes to push us into war. Woods also criticizes FDR for his New Deal legislation because it largely ignored the southern states and helped the western states because those were the voters he needed to court. He also disagrees with those who think that the New Deal brought us out of the Great Depression.
Woods goes on to say that when the national government tried to regulate the economy, it made things worse rather than made things better.
As I read further and further, I started to see that Woods is a right wing conservative who believes that the federal government should just leave the people alone as much as possible (which is why he liked Warren Harding and Calvin Coolidge - they didn't do much).
You're not going to agree with everything Woods says, but you should find the book worthwhile and very interesting to read.
Undoing liberal academia's brainwashing.......2007-09-21
Don't be a lemming by falling for the lies taught by your liberal history professors. Learn the truth.
A Refreshing Look at History.......2007-09-12
This book will expand the view of American Hostory that was persented to you during your years in the school system. It gives a perspective that will cause you to think and examine why you think the way you do.
Very interesting.......2007-09-03
The book reads easy, is loaded with information. Some of the topics I think most will be vaguely familiar with, although some were already known very well. In all, it does remind us Americans of how much of our history is blatantly false and forcefed through the schools. This is what I would characterize as a conservative leaning book, or Liberal, if you know the true meaning of Liberalism. It's definately not a LEFT wing hack job, or a right wing one for that matter, it's interesting, insightful and full of topics most Americans should be interested in....but too few are. They just vote like they were raised to, Dem or Repub. A good book.
Book Description
The latest installment in the New York Times bestselling Politically Incorrect Guide series expands on the pro-South slant of the hugely successful Politically Incorrect Guide to American History. Author Clint Johnson shows why the South, with its emphasis on traditional values, family, faith, military service, good manners, small government, and independent-minded people, should certainly rise again.
Customer Reviews:
Ha Ha.......2007-10-06
Ha ha ha! What rubbish! I haven't laughed so hard in years. Either this the author is lying through his teeth or he is very, very dumb.
sure burns well, though.
PIG to the South.......2007-10-05
Charming and funny; maybe stretches a bit to make points about Southern "superiority" (which as a Southerner I agree with, of course), and seems to make the same points redundantly. Interesting historical facts, which have often been lost in political correctness in the last few decades.
Braggadocio and Paranoia.......2007-09-25
The subtext of this invective-laden "guide" is that somehow the values and lifestyle of the Old South are threatened by outsiders, obviously them d**m Yankees again. To support his theme, the author labors through several chapters of old-fashioned Lost Cause historiography and an entirely fantasized version of Reconstruction and the Jim Crow era of apartheid. But that's not the worst! The author also launches into the same-old-same-old diatribe that race relations are actually better in the South than in the North. That nonsense has been around since Joel Chandler Harris, since the antebellum apologists. Surely the recent events in a small town in Louisiana prove how fundamentally racist much of the South remains today. Is that an example of the South rising again which we should view sympathetically?
I'd give it six stars if I could.......2007-09-12
A great fast read that sets the record straight on many misconceptions about the South. There are a few small errors, such as there are 43 cars in a Nextel Cup race not 42, but nothing of any substance. As a person who had the good fortune to leave New York and move to God's own spot on Earth, TEXAS, this book just reinforced what I've found out from living in the South and explained why the South is the way it is. A must read for all smug northeners who just don't see beyond there own borders and for those feel the need for a strong Federal Government.
PIG to the South.......2007-07-22
Being a Southerner, I enjoyed hearing good things about my 'homeland'. Unabashedly pro South, the author nontheless paints a compelling picture about what makes my part of the country a sort of mystical place where good men and women raise good families, following tradition and common sense. There is good history here too, sewing the thread of constitutional and economic politics into a solid base on why the War between the States was fought. If you are from 'up there' you may still enjoy reading about what makes us folks from 'down here' in Gods country tick. Cheers, D2.
Book Description
You think you know about Darwinism and intelligent design, but did you know: *There is no overwhelming evidence for Darwinism; *Intelligent design is based on scientific evidence, not religious belief; *What many public schools teach about Darwinism is based on known falsehoods; *Scientists at major universities believe in intelligent design; *Scientists who question Darwinism are punished --by public institutions using your tax dollars. Battle-hardened veteran with doctorates in biology and theology sets the record straight in The Politically Incorrect Guide to Darwin and Intelligent Design.
Customer Reviews:
They can believe in Darwinism if they want to, but why do they.......2007-10-12
so forcefully shove their bias down everyone else's throat, and prevent both students and the public from considering any view but theirs?
I loved this book, and like many feel a debt of deep gratitude to Dr. Wells for his truly impressive achievement. Make no mistake, those like Dr. Wells who have exhibited such independence and moral courage in opposing the dishonesty that's inherent in our institutions regarding the teaching of evolution, are exposing themselves to censor, vitriol and hatred.
Evolutionists themselves acknowledge that progress in science and acceptance of evolution are not interdependent. Why are they so zealous in enforcing their dogmatic belief, even to the point of exclusion from consideration, any ideas that they feel are in conflict, no matter how valid, well supported and articulated?...Why?
The force-feeding of evolution on society has as its ultimate goal the rejection of all religious belief, and therefore of morality connected with spiritual consciousness and yearning.
It seems to me that radical Darwinists are attempting to impose their atheistic vision and materialistic values on everyone, to deny humanity access to its spiritual dimension, to convince us that we have no obligation to a search for meaning, that we have no right to a higher fulfillment.
America was founded on the principle of religious freedom, and many have defended this lofty ideal with their lives. The intolerant, militant Darwinists hiding behind the guise of their pseudo-science have gone a long ways in overturning this ideal. They've taken over our institutions of learning, and now control the media. They've aided and abetted the process of opening the floodgates of materialism and moral poison that have flooded over us, resulting in our present state of decadent, degernate rot. The Darwinists are applauding because it proves that we're just beasts. It's what they want.
The index tells it all.......2007-09-20
If you simply look at the index for Intelligent Design, evidence for, you will see listed 1, 4, 8, 198-199. Turn to those pages and you will see the "evidence" is merely the use of the word evidence in a statement like "since intelligent design is based on evidence..."
I've read this cover to cover, and I did find the arguments ID makes against Darwinism's evidence (which have been answered in other books -- flagellum, blood cascade, the eye) but there is no evidence presented for ID beyond that. Wells just says it's based on evidence, that there are experiments and field work being carried out (in secret), but he never gives us more.
It is interesting that Wells states that the evidence for Darwinism --common descent, natural selection, random mutation--is underwhelming. Interesting because his friends and ID colleague Michael Behe writes:
"As I wrote inThe Edge of Evolution: The Search for the Limits of Darwinism, Darwinism is a multifaceted theory, and to properly evaluate the theory one has to be very careful not to confuse its different aspects. Common descent, natural selection, and random mutation are separate concepts; the first two are well supported, but the power of random mutation is not. " The first two are well-supported. By evidence, one assumes.
This was a truly frustrating book.
Same old rehashed "arguments"..........2007-09-02
Oh, I'm sorry, I thought "politically incorrect" meant "having a charming and irreverent disregard for the political norms of the day when discussing topics that are usually stifled by convention". Apparently it just means "rabid, frothing, conservative pap".
Skeptisim not allowed.......2007-08-30
It is doubtful that there is a more divisive issue in our public schools than the mere thought of explaining our existence in terms other than Darwinism. Regardless of the innumerable holes in the theory any suggestion of other possibilities is anathema.
Intelligent Design the Darwinists say is nothing more than code for God based creation. And of course anything smacking of something greater than us leads secularists to fits of explosive anger.
Evolution means change over time and I don't know many people that have a problem with that. However Mr. Darwin's theory is entirely different. The "theory" holds that... Natural Selection plus Random Mutation equals an ENTIRE NEW SPECIES. And look as they may, over 150-years now, no one has come close to proving that.
My personal problem with Darwin, a problem that is explored deeply in this terrific book, is how those that accept it do so to the exclusion of any other possible explanation. Science has a twin, a virtually conjoined twin, "Skepticism." But Darwinists have rejected sciences twin with the utmost vehemence.
We are not allowed to be skeptics in discussing the origin of life. We must, herd like; accept Darwinism and all its myriad problems. We must have faith that an amateur naturalist that lived 200-years ago, was and continues to be right in all respects regarding the greatest scientific and philosophical question since the beginning of time.
Skepticism is not allowed.
Many of the reviews of this book are being written by people.......2007-08-28
who have not read it.
It is a well written, easy to understand book on an Theory of Darwinism and Intelligent Design.
This book is easy read and will get your brain in gear as you analyize both sides of the story. When, as suggested by the author I took a look at my son's biology book and saw Haeckel's sketches I was convinced.
"To support his case he [Haeckel] began to fake evidence. Charged with fraud by five professors and convicted by a university court at Jena, he agreed that a small percentage of his embryonic drawings were forgeries; he was merely filling in and reconstructing the missing links when the evidence was thin, and he claimed unblushingly that hundreds of the best observers and biologists lie under the same charge."--*Michael Pitman, Adam and Evolution (1984), p. 120.
For that alone it is worth your time.
Book Description
Covers subjects spanning evolution, stem cell research, abortion, HIV/AIDS, global warming, and cloning to help you tune up your balony detector to expose the liberal, anti-religious propaganda we're being fed.
Customer Reviews:
All over the place, plus good claims completely outweighed by dubious ones.......2007-09-26
Following the guides to American History and Islam, the then-new "Politically Incorrect Guide" series turned to science for its third title, released at the tail end of 2005.
Given the politicisation of science since the Kyoto Protocol and controversies over "Creation Science", this was to be expected. However, "The Politically Incorrect Guide to Science", not unexpectedly, never gets into a clear and consistent routine - Tom Bethell seems simply to want to refute claims regardless of the evidence either way. For the most part, he writes like a contrarian relying on belief without any evidence. With evidence and practicality, I have no problem with strongly-held beliefs, but without them there can be many traps.
The tone is set from the first two chapters, on global warming and nuclear power. The absence from the book of clear evidence, like changes in Australian rainfall, that strongly supports man-made global warming is really occurring, nor of evidence that in the supposedly not-warming Southern Hemisphere, sea surface temperatures have actually been rising more rapidly according to many climate journals I read as a student at Melbourne University. Like the PIG to global warming, the critical mistake of taking 1970s "global cooling" issue out of the context of the discovery of glacial/interglacial cycles during the past 400,000 years is made. Theories of these cycles have been refined considerably since "The Politically Incorrect Guide to Science" was published. Bethell's view that nuclear power is clean is likewise problematic: uranium is one of the most energy-intensive metals to produce and when that is factored in nuclear power is still a big producer of greenhouse gases.
Tied in are Bethell's views on biodiversity. Whilst in remote, infertile, rugged areas there will always exist extra species to be discovered, Bethell ignores how many species are on the verge of extinction either from global warming or habitat loss. He ignores scientists' well-established knowledge that a population below 500 individuals is not viable. This makes the threat to biodiversity much deeper than he dares say. Even his views on evolution contradict Tim Flannery's demonstration that in many environments competition is not an important factor in natural selection, as Bethell appears to think.
Whilst his claims about the dangers of cloning and genetic engineering I wholeheartedly agree with, even these sections of the book ignore issues that are very important, like the potential for genetically engineered plants to become "superweeds" that take over cropland and natural vegetation uncontrollably. His look at cancer and the pesticide debate is done equally poorly with many facts brushed over in a manner that is most likely deliberate. Examples are real or potential resistance to DDT in malarial mosquitoes, or the fact that most zoologists know many animals can never form fossils because they lack hard parts.
Whilst the section on science and religion does have some real evidence behind it, Bethell's inability or refusal to look at any single topic in a chronological or otherwise sequential manner makes this part of the book equally lacking.
The fourth book in this series on women, sex and feminism was so logical in structure and arguments (even with poor citation) that you wonder how even so parochial an organisation as Regnery cannot find someone capable of a better job than done in "The Politically Incorrect Guide to Science". I must say that even if some of its points are actually valid, this book is too poorly structured and has so many dubious claims that giving it more than one star is impossible.
Laughable.......2007-07-19
Although the author has a fine education from Oxford University, he has less than a child's grasp of science. Repeatedly, he uses lame opinion in place of facts to support his weak contentions. This is one of the most biased, least rational pieces of misinformation I've had the displeasure to pick up. It's truly worthy of zero stars.
"Politically Incorrect Guide" = PIG.......2007-07-18
Oh, man...
This book is beyond bad. It can best be described as misinformation. It's just plain wrong in so many ways. And yet, there are people buying it and probably soaking up the author's obvious agenda and thinking that they've somehow been informed on what science is and how it works. A glance at the reviews here makes it evident that a certain audience applauds ignorance and belittles factual knowledge, maybe intentionally, perhaps unknowingly. The author dishes up healthy servings of political opinion, but seems to have only a child's grasp of the natural sciences. Instead, he seems to embrace the discredited 'everything is political' concept and in this case, he's applying it to something outside his field of expertise.
Science itself is apolitical. But it's the politicians (and their lackeys) who are quick to embrace or attack any scientific findings that may be useful or harmful to their cause. So, any politicizing is coming from politicians, and not from scientists. Besides, this entire obsession with political correctness seems to be nothing more than one political side whining about the other's supposed intentions. In this book, Mr Bethell attributes motivations that he cannot possibly have knowledge of. And he tries to connect things that are separated by decades and degrees. For instance, he tries to blame environmentalists from 40 years ago who got the insecticide DDT banned, due to its drastic negative impact on ecosystems, for the tragic deaths of thousands in the third world. Baloney, pure and simple.
Pass on this PIG. Your mind will thank you.
Very very weak.......2007-07-07
I had hoped for a vibrant discussion of alternate hypotheses for generally accepted scientific theory (and remember, theory in scientific parlance means fact -- for example gravitational theory means gravity is a fact). However, Bethell cites lone authors as if citation alone of a well-known alternative hypothesis (and remember hypothesis means it is not an established fact) contravenes the theory. It all becomes a mix of unsubstantiated assertions and allegations. I'm sure there are lies as well, but I doubt he put them there. As a legitimate book that moves our debates forward, it is worthless. As crutch to hold up faltering arguments with a purely political bent, well maybe it's better at that. If you're interested, buy a used one. You won't want to keep it.
Rick.......2007-06-27
The book is very enjoyable. It gives a nice counter to all the hype we here about what is happening in the world of science.
Book Description
The latest in the New York Times bestselling series! The Politically Incorrect Guide to Women, Sex and Feminism is the perfect antidote to the lies told in boardrooms, locker rooms, and universities that are brainwashing young women every day.
Customer Reviews:
Carrie, please don't write anymore books........2007-10-11
Carrie obviously has no clue whatsoever what a feminist is. Feminism never caused women to be disposable sex objects. The idea that women are disposable sex objects is not a new phenomenon- it has been going on since long before feminism became mainstream. To blame feminism on it is ignorant and uninformed. Maybe she should have picked up a history book before writing a book herself.
Not bad even with poor sourcing and lost opportunities (3.5 stars).......2007-09-25
The "Politically Incorrect Guide to Women, Sex and Feminism" was the fourth book in that series, whose aim is supposedly to counter liberal bias in the media.
The book's essential argument is that women today have been duped by radical feminists into believing that they were the same as men and that they should aim for the traditional goals of family and a married life. The book, unlike most other Politically Incorrect Guides, does a very good job in this respect. It gives some quite reasonable statistic about how women who marry are happier than those who do not, and that there are a great many dangers from the casual sex so much supported by Sixties liberals. It also shows that many women do not want to work outside the home and that few are happier because of having to do so.
It also, though not to the extent that might be desired, shows that there is a lot of scientific evidence for innate sex differences. It is a pity that these biological differences are not related to societal considerations because there simply cannot exist doubt that belief in sexual identity is triggered by situations like those in Europe today where valuable resources are non-existent. In fact, the effects of these societal situations on sex roles may well explain why women in Europe or Canada probably do not have the same desire as women in the US. (The book never considers differences between the US and other countries and this constitutes a big fault of the whole PIG series that greatly dims its potential).
The book also has one strange lost opportunity because during Europe's own "culture war" during the early twentieth century - as shown by the childhoods of many people born back then like Simone de Beauvoir or Albino Luciani - women were far more socially conservative than men. Indeed, as a student of personality theory I know very well that this would be expected and it is a pity Carrie Lucas fails to even think of this possibility. The radical left's argument for extreme masculinisation of women (already achieved in Europe), for all its ability to permit social change with otherwise impossible ease, has great drawback on a personal level. Women who are as individualistic and independent as the Left wish generally have great trouble raising children because they lack the ability to relate on an emotional level. They are also often, as my own personal experience as well as surveys shows, very unhappy because they tend to be very angry.
Whilst there are few unsound arguments, one needs much better sourcing to verify most of them, and as with the guide to Capitalism, these are largely absent. Still, even for those on the Left, this book offers many sound arguments and is by far the best in the PIG series. Real rating would be 3.5 stars out of five - women is the topic on which the Right is most effective because it is most scientific there.
IT NEEDED TO BE SAID.......2007-09-21
I wish this book would've been around when I was in my 20's. I enjoyed reading a more balanced approach to feminism. Lukas is not anti-woman, stuck in the '50's, or patriarchal as her critics have described. She's not telling women what they can or cannot do either. She's done her research and put the fact out there for your review. The biggest drawback for me was that it looks like a 3rd grader proofread the book.
Finally, a voice of reason.......2007-09-03
I must start off by confessing that I haven't had the chance to read the book yet, but from everything I've heard about it, and reading all the other comments here, it's safe to say that this book presents a viewpoint that is much needed in our society today to balance out the heavy-handed feminism that's shoved down our throats at every turn.I'd like to see every feminist stop for one moment and consider this: What feminism basically teaches is that there is no real value being "just" a woman, that our only worth comes about when we ignore our natural nurturing and nesting instincts and push ourselves to be more like men. On the other hand, those with more traditional beliefs see the indispensible contribution that we offer as wives, mothers, and women, and honor and appeciate us for the intelligence, skill, and creativity it takes to efficiently take on the business of running a home.The other issue with feminism is its complete hypocrisy. If a woman says she wants her man to pamper and spoil her and treat her like a queen, she deserves it and is encouraged to demand he treat her that way. But if a man dares to confess that he longs for his wife to spoil him and treat him like the king of his castle, he's just a big, fat sexist jerk. If a woman wants to go out with her girlfriends, well, she needs her "me-time" and it's her Goddess-given right, but if he wants to relax and play golf with his buddies on Saturday, he's a selfish brute who's ignoring her needs. Or if she helps him with something he typically does, she expects him to be endlessly patient and understanding in her attempts in ufamiliar territory, and bow down to kiss her feet in gratitude for her assistance, but if she asks for his help with something, she'll nitpick if it's not done to her perfect standards, and barely says "thank you" because he ought to be doing those things anyway. Not to mention the poor guy who works hard all day, and comes home to a wife who expects him to do "his equal share" of the work around the house, even if she stays home or works only part-time. Just some food for thought...
Another great book in the PIG series.......2007-08-31
It is unfortunate that it takes a whole book to point out several rather simple inconvenient truths: women and men are (gasp!) different from each other, that sexual promiscuity in women has led to MORE, not less, sexual exploitation and that marriage DOES have a role to fill in society (and not simply to form an economical unit).
My favorite part is a sidebar in the book called "Lifetime Television's Line-up of Fear," which lists three typical movies aired by that channel with their description. I remember Lifetime and what I used to call "Lifetime's Man-Hating Movie of the Month." "Tonight on Lifetime: 'I Married a Stinking MAN!' A small-town woman is exploited by a male in an unhealthy relationship called a marriage. When the man attempts to convince her to allow herself to become biological host to some sort of growth ("preganancy") she eventually detaches herself from her right-wing, homophobic "husband," goes to law school, becomes and honorary lesbian and is eventually appointed a Supreme Court Justice by President Bill Clinton. Starring Jessica Simpson and Ted Danson."
Lukas does an excellent job in explaining the conservative viewpoint on sex and feminism and yes, you can be pro-woman without being a feminist regardless of what the media says.
Average customer rating:
|
The Politically Incorrect Guide to Darwin and Intelligent Design
Jonathan, Ph.d. Wqells
Manufacturer: Blackstone Audio Inc.
ProductGroup: Book
Binding: Audio CD
 General
| Religion & Spirituality
| Subjects
| Books
Science & Religion
| Religious Studies
| Religion & Spirituality
| Subjects
| Books
General
| Science
| Subjects
| Books
General
| History & Philosophy
| Science
| Subjects
| Books
General
| Evolution
| Professional Science
| Professional & Technical
| Subjects
| Books
Nonfiction
| Books on CD
| Audiobooks
| Formats
| Books
General
| Religion & Spirituality
| Books on CD
| Audiobooks
| Formats
| Books
All Titles
| Qualifying Textbooks - Fall 2007
| Stores
| Books
Similar Items:
-
The Edge of Evolution: The Search for the Limits of Darwinism
ASIN: 0786163755 |
Product Description
The latest and most bitterly contested battle in the culture war is the controversy over Darwin and intelligent design. But much of what youve heard about it is wrong. Jonathan Wells, a battle-hardened veteran with doctorates in biology and theology, sets the record straight. In clear, non-technical language, he explains who is fighting whom, the root of the conflict, and the evidence for and against Darwinism and intelligent design. He also explains what is ultimately at stake for liberals and conservatives, Christians and non-Christians, educators, policymakers, and scientists.
You think you know about Darwinism and intelligent design, but did you know:
There is no overwhelming evidence for Darwinism
Intelligent design is based on scientific evidence, not religious belief
What many public schools teach about Darwinism is based on known falsehoods
Scientists at major universities believe in intelligent design
Scientists who question Darwinism are punishedby public institutions using your tax dollars
The Politically Incorrect Guide to Darwin and Intelligent Design concludes with a report from the newest and most exciting front in the warand some surprising predictions about the future.
Product Description
While the government claims to be a representative republic, somehow hot-button topics from gay marriage to the allocation of Florida's presidential electors always seem to be decided by unelected judges. What gives them the right to decide such issues? The judges say it's the Constitution. Author and law professor Kevin Gutzman shows that there is very little relationship between the Constitution ratified by the thirteen states more than two centuries ago and the "constitutional law" imposed upon us since then. Instead of the intended system of state-level decision makers and elected officials, judges have given us a centralized system in which bureaucrats and appointed officials make most of the important policies. The Constitution guarantees our rights and freedoms, but activist judges are threatening those very rights because of the Supreme Court's willingness to substitute its own opinions for the perfectly constitutional laws enacted by "we, the people" through our elected representatives.
Customer Reviews:
What Does "Original Intent" Really Mean?.......2007-10-14
Despite its satirical title, Kevin Gutzman's guide to our Constitution is a serious study of both "original intent" and the antecedents of our constitutional republic. Not written in lawyers' "legalese", but in a pithy, yet informative style, it is truly a pleasure to read. Professor Gutzman's book accurately documents how "revisionist" federal judges and "progressive" legislators have systematically distorted our most precious founding document.
For those who have ever wondered what "constitutional originalists" actually believe, The Politically Incorrect Guide To The Constitution will provide all the answers. Likewise, if you are citizen-voter interested in how changes in legal interpretation and political ideology have impacted American history, then this may also be the source for which you have been searching. Its publication is most timely, because these are certainly issues that will be at the forefront of debate in Election 2008.
Robert W. Faubel, M.A.
Former Fellow,
James Madison Foundation
The Constitution and why none of it matters.......2007-09-17
There's not a lot about the Constitution, per se, in "The Politically Incorrect Guide to the Constitution." Most everyone knows the structural stuff -- three branches, elections in November, blah blah -- and the rest ... well, the rest hardly matters anymore.
Thomas Woods has already produced an excellent "Politically Incorrect Guide to American History," but "The Politically Incorrect Guide to the Constitution" necessarily includes a good deal of history to explain why we've reached that point. The fundamental point of Kevin Gutzman's outstanding book is that "constitutional law" as understood and taught in the US has little if anything to do with the document adopted on September 17, 1787, and ratified by the several states over the next three years. Instead, "constitutional law" is the body of decisions and "interpretations" issued by the Supreme Court and lower courts. It's this idea of "law," and the impact it has had on the republic the founders created, that is the real object of Gutzman's study.
The resulting book is spirited, opinionated, and remarkably informative. Out of more than two centuries of jurisprudence, the author has isolated some important themes and trends. Long after the Federalist Party was dead and buried, John Marshall and his intellectual heirs have succeeded in achieving the arch-Federalist goal, Gutzman argues, of turning a confederation of sovereign states into a centralized nation, and replacing "the authority of elected state governments with the authority of a few lawyers, appointed by a president to positions of lifetime tenure without any check on their power" (p. 86).
Along the way, he introduces us to some key personalities and calls out some important suggested reading. Most importantly, he gives us chapter-and-verse examples of how courts, particularly the Supreme Court, have twisted, distorted, "interpreted," or ignored the clear language of the Constitution to gild judges' own opinions with the luster of "constitutional law."
By making these arguments and charting these trends, Gutzman is taking on generations of America's legal establishment, as well as the received wisdom of most citizens that the word of the federal Supreme Court is final and that's just the way it's supposed to be. A reader who takes Gutzman's work seriously (and she should), may well end up both outraged and convinced that achieving any fundamental change would be an exceptionally Sisyphean task. Certainly it should make her sympathetic to the great American abolitionist and anarchist philosopher Lysander Spooner, who wrote way back in 1870 that "whether the Constitution really be one thing or another, this much is certain -- that it has either authorized such a government as we have had, or has been powerless to prevent it. In either case, it is unfit to exist."
Today is Constitution Day. Take a moment to remember what was meant to be, and what could have been.
Short, Easy, and Accurate.......2007-09-09
The Politically Incorrect Guide to the Constitution is exelent. It gave me a different way to look at a number of court cases I was already familiar with and helped put them in a historical and ideological context. It could use a little more detail on cases and consequences.
Everyone should read this and all of the Pol Incorrect guides.......2007-08-31
Books like this will help American's learn the politically incorrect truth about various subjects without all the revisionist history and skewed garbage from the left. I bought this copy for a gift to a family member in law school. HIGHLY RECOMMEND!!!!
The Constitution vs. the Supreme Court.......2007-08-27
This book is an eye-opener on the impact of the Supreme Court on the history of this country. The book is written with humor and is easy to read. If you think our constitution sets the parameters for our laws, guess again! I liked this well-documented book.
Books:
- The Republican War on Science
- The Rise of Islam and the Bengal Frontier, 1204-1760 (Comparative Studies on Muslim Societies , No 17)
- The River of Grace: The Story of John Calvin
- The Seven Ages of Man's Best Friend: A Comprehensive Guide for Caring for Your Dog Through All the Stages of Life
- The Toyota Way: 14 Management Principles from the World's Greatest Manufacturer
- The Unfinished Nation: A Concise History of the American People
- The Western Tradition: From the Renaissance to the Present
- The World Is Flat [Updated and Expanded]: A Brief History of the Twenty-first Century
- Thermopylae: The Battle for the West
- Thermopylae: The Battle That Changed the World
Books Index
Books Home
Recommended Books
- Cable News Confidential: My Misadventures in Corporate Media
- The Going-To-Bed Book
- Risk Communication: A Handbook For Communicating Environmental, Safety, And Health Risks
- Opposing Viewpoints Digests - Endangered Species
- Situational Analysis: Grounded Theory After the Postmodern Turn
- The New Greek-English Interlinear NT
- The Rat Nervous System
- The Man Who Mistook His Wife For A Hat: And Other Clinical Tales
- Open Source Solutions For Small Business Problems
- Occupational Exposure Limits: Key Document: Criteria For The Qualitative Evaluation Of Human Neurobe
Unstoppable Global Warming: Every 1,500 Years
The Politically Incorrect Guide to Darwinism and Intelligent Design
America Alone: The End of the World as We Know It
The Politically Incorrect Guide(tm) to Capitalism (Politically Incorrect Guides)
The Truth About Muhammad: Founder of the World's Most Intolerant Religion
