Scan barcode
thekarpuk's review
2.0
A pissy tone in writing troubles me deeply. It's doubly troubling when I'm otherwise enjoying the content.
"Corrupted Science" covers some pretty fascinating territories. Discussing the abuses of science both from within and without is pretty fascinating stuff. The first third of the book works great for this reason.
Reading about often famous scientists who fudged their data, gaffs by the military in resesarch in development, and funded pseudoscience like ESP are all well discussed.
The first issue I have comes up in the Intelligent Design chapter. John Grant is one of those delightful people who seems to think religion in its entirety is retarded and unnecessary. It's the first chapter where some unprofessional prose creeps in, with smart ass jokey asides that really break the flow of reading.
This really isn't the forum for a religious discussion, so I'll be brief in saying that regardless of your faith or belief, stating you are certain about the unknowable is a theist argument.
Anytime people start arguing on either side about evolution and religion, I usually find myself confused as to why the argument is occurring.
The last chunk of the book I take issue more on formatting than content. Here's the chapter flow:
Hitler
Stalin
George W. Bush
Seriously? We're really going to phrase our argument by indirectly comparing the former doofus in chief to of the most terrifying mass murdering despots in history? Really?
The Hitler and Stalin chapters are rather interesting taken on their own. The Bush chapter is even insightful in regards to the administrations battles with the FDA and EPA over various issues. But collectively it comes off as a bit melodramatic.
Overall the biggest impression I get from this book is that we as a people don't know nearly enough about science. It hurts us in many areas, and makes for laziness in the government and in the press when handling it. This is a valuable point and I wish it had been more the focus.
It's not a boring book by any means, but it loses massive points from me for the lack of professionalism. I have no patience for this Michael Moore crap in my non-fiction.
"Corrupted Science" covers some pretty fascinating territories. Discussing the abuses of science both from within and without is pretty fascinating stuff. The first third of the book works great for this reason.
Reading about often famous scientists who fudged their data, gaffs by the military in resesarch in development, and funded pseudoscience like ESP are all well discussed.
The first issue I have comes up in the Intelligent Design chapter. John Grant is one of those delightful people who seems to think religion in its entirety is retarded and unnecessary. It's the first chapter where some unprofessional prose creeps in, with smart ass jokey asides that really break the flow of reading.
This really isn't the forum for a religious discussion, so I'll be brief in saying that regardless of your faith or belief, stating you are certain about the unknowable is a theist argument.
Anytime people start arguing on either side about evolution and religion, I usually find myself confused as to why the argument is occurring.
The last chunk of the book I take issue more on formatting than content. Here's the chapter flow:
Hitler
Stalin
George W. Bush
Seriously? We're really going to phrase our argument by indirectly comparing the former doofus in chief to of the most terrifying mass murdering despots in history? Really?
The Hitler and Stalin chapters are rather interesting taken on their own. The Bush chapter is even insightful in regards to the administrations battles with the FDA and EPA over various issues. But collectively it comes off as a bit melodramatic.
Overall the biggest impression I get from this book is that we as a people don't know nearly enough about science. It hurts us in many areas, and makes for laziness in the government and in the press when handling it. This is a valuable point and I wish it had been more the focus.
It's not a boring book by any means, but it loses massive points from me for the lack of professionalism. I have no patience for this Michael Moore crap in my non-fiction.
More...