Factor

Something about Plimpton's writing, his lack of adjectives I think, makes for quick reading. I read this in one sitting and laughed through a lot of it. This little book is Plimpton wandering around the country asking famous athletes and CEOs for advice on his upcoming horseshoes rematch against then-president George H W Bush. He asks each of these people, including Bush, what it is that makes them succeed in what they do. It's not hard work, practice, or innate abilities but rather some "ingredient... a potion that people in all walks of life would go to extravagant lengths to obtain if it came in a small earthenware jug corked at its mouth." In the process of interviewing people around the country he loses badly to Billie Jean King at tennis, discovers that his athletic stature most resembles a bull, and kicks it around Camp David. Classic Plimpton, and a unique look at Bush the husband and father. Read it on a rainy day.

You've probably had a day when you said to yourself, "If I had known it was going to be this kind of day, I never would have gotten out of bed!" You may have gone through times when you felt, "If I had known life was going to be like this, I never would have been born!"

Those of us who accept ideas such as precognition and reincarnation know the irony of such statements. Somewhere during the night our sleeping selves did know what kind of day was coming. Somewhere in the heavens our unmaterialized souls did know what life held in store.

Why then do we forget? Some have speculated that it is exactly because the foreknowledge would discourage us from going through the experience. If so, then why do we sometimes get brief breaks in the amnesia, allowing us glimpses of the future? What is this game?

I'm pondering these paradoxes because I've just read a book that has fascinated and shaken me more than most I've seen lately. The book is, Your Nostradamas Factor: Accessing Your Innate Ability to See into The Future (Simon & Schuster). The author, Ingo Swann, is a prominent psychic, learned and influential in the field of parapsychology. He has participated in countless experiments, projects his own creative wit helped make more interesting than the average statistics-gathering routine. By inventing the term, "remote viewing," a techno-speak metaphor for clairvoyance, he prompted a new line of research that has achieved one of the best track records demonstrating the psychic abilities of the average person. In his newest book he turns his talents to what he calls "future-seeing."

He presents the mental dynamics responsible for future-seeing as well as for blocking future-seeing. He repeatedly emphasizes diagramming one's ideas to foster the psychic process of visualizing. He gives many hints on how to release our inner Nostradamus factor from the triple-walled prison of ignorance, prejudice, and expectation. One of the propositions in his theory, refreshing to someone who lives in a community where being psychic seems to pass for an education, is that it is easier to correctly see the future for subjects about which you are knowledgeable than for subjects about which you are totally ignorant. Knowledge creates a range of feasibilities for the future, focusing psychic sensitivity on anticipating the unexpected.

To test his theory on eliciting the Nostradamus factor, Mr. Swann conducted his own experiment, the "American Prophecy Project." For somewhat over a year, he distributed a newsletter to a select mailing list in which he published his predictions. He accurately predicted the U.S. economic downturn of 1990 and Margaret Thatcher's resignation, both of which were contrary to general expectations at the time he published them. In other areas where he was less knowledgeable, such as concerning geological events (e.g., earthquakes), his predictions were less than stunning.

The book concludes with a solemnly guided tour of the future. Swann challenges us to form our own predictions and to act accordingly. His own predictions are quite sobering and yet different from what we might expect. Most of us have been exposed to enough fuss about "end times" to become numb to the future. Such numbness is exactly the opposite of what Swann intends. He wants us, in fact, to wake up to our own sense of the future, to begin to anticipate it more consciously.

Swann proposes that future-seeing properly belongs to us as a daily tool for "right living." It is not just the ability to see around the corner but also the ability to anticipate the consequences of our actions. What kind of future are you creating now? Can't you see it?

I wonder what it would be like to awaken in the morning and see flash before me what my day will be like, and watch that prognosis change as I shift to put my right foot down first instead of my left. Yes, every wiggle, every thought, has its ripple effect. As chaos theory shows, the flap of a butterfly's wing can lead to a hurricane thousands of miles away!

We can know all things, but can we handle all that information? No wonder we play ostrich with our future-seeing ability. Sometimes, however, our Nostradamus factor does try to get our attention, to prompt us to get our head out of the sand. How then do we respond to these occasional wake up calls?

Take violence, for example, whether in the form of guns, earthquakes or financial calamities. Violence is a wake up call that Swann highlights as an ominous portent of things to come. Violence is a last resort reaction to inertia. If you have ever been so frustrated with your inability (AKA unwillingness?) to change a bad habit that you got angry with yourself, perhaps you can intuit how violence is born. Violence signals us there's conflict about change.

There is a war brewing, Swann says, a war where the future tries to save itself from the past. Today's cigarette smoker is experiencing a precursor to this war. A private habit has become a public nuisance and the extermination campaign attracts zealots. Smokers are the target of aggressive attempts to extinguish their habit. If you feel righteous about society's right to clean air, think about how righteous your children's generation may feel one day about their right to survive, even if it means extinguishing those people whose private habits contribute to ecological or economic malaise.

"If you don't like the future, change it!" Such is our enlighte

I give the book 3 stars only because the authors advocate using a feedback loop of progress. After having trained 5 months on the system these are the flaws that I have discovered. Please read carefully.

Power Factor training over simplifies certain biomechanical factors both in the definition of the power indices and in their use in tailoring workouts for maximum effectiveness. Their definition of the power factor oversimplifies the definition of mechanical power by neglecting the distance the weight is lifted. Mechanical power is defined to be the force (F) exerted on an object multiplied by the distance (D) the object traveled divided by the time (T) of force application (5).

Power = F * D / T

By neglecting distance (D) in their definition of the power factor, the developers have overestimated the value of partial reps in their training scheme since the weight moves over a shorter distance per rep.

Furthermore, their definition of the power factor only takes into account the forces exerted on the bar. Higher forces exerted on the bar does not automatically translate to higher muscular tension. Neglecting this fact, the developers have overestimated the value of compound exercises and strongest-range-of-motion exercises. By definition, compound exercises work multiple muscle groups simultaneously, so the power generated is derived from multiple muscles. Therefore, the external power generated in a compound exercise should not be compared to that generated in an isolation exercise in which the power is derived primarily from a single muscle group. For example, the power generated from a squatting exercise contains strong contributions from the vastus, gluteus, and hamstring muscles. One cannot reasonably compare the power generated from a squat to that generated from a leg extension, derived mainly from the vastus.

The definition of the power factor also overestimates the value of strongest-range-of-motion exercises since muscular tension is often at a minimum in these ranges while most of the weight is supported by intersegmental joint loads. Therefore, more weight can be lifted in these ranges with the same or reduced muscular tension. For example, Power Factor training recommends athletes to perform partial reps in the final four inches of the squat movement near the lock out position. In this position, the legs are almost straight and relative less muscular force is needed to support any given amount of weight. Also, the power index, which is given proportionally less attention in the Power Factor training system, appears to be the developers' attempt to reconcile the fact that power factors decrease as workout length is increased. If power factor was the only index in the system, athletes would conclude that they should be performing only one set of each exercise. Thus, the developers defined the power index to be the power factor multiplied by the total weight lifted divided by a million to keep the large number manageable. This index biases the athlete to train with more volume since it gives more emphasis to the total weight lifted. The system never discussed how exactly to find the optimal combination of power factor and power index, which is a major shortcoming since improvement in one tends to work against the other. Furthermore, the definition of the power index has no physiological or mechanical basis.

CONCLUSION

Power factor training is just another system which has touted itself to be the "key" to effective training. Because the developers use mathematical equations, they have fooled some trainers to believe that they are employing real science in evaluating their workouts. However, their definition of the power factor ignores the distance the weight moves, leading to a false rationale for partial-rep training. Furthermore, by only taking into account the weight on the bar and not muscular tension, the system produced a false rationale for the superiority of compound and strongest-range-of-motion exercises. This is not to say that these types of training have no value in a weight training program since there may be other reasons for employing them. The important thing is that the power factor cannot be used as claimed -- as an objective way of determining the muscle stimulating benefits of any workout. Beyond the mechanical oversimplification in their definition of the power factor, is the problematic definition itself. All the literature suggest that instantaneous power during the concentric phase of an exercise is an important training stimulus, not the average power generated over a workout.

Before you even think of getting this book, be prepared to devote a few hours, learning the concept Sisco and Little speak of in this Power Factor title. This book is scientific, and the calculations take a lot of time to get used to. While I don't feel they are 100% legitamite, they are still a good guideline to follow. Face the facts, most bodybuilders don't keep a detailed log of their workouts. I feel the suggestions they provide are basically just to lead you in the right direction for keeping tabs on your workout.

Now, as for the workout itself. All I can say is.. "Wow". Who ever thought of strong range training is a genius. Patrial reps have far become my workout of choice, mainly because I believe it yields the best results I have ever seen in my 7 years of training. I have never gotten so much bigger and stronger in such a short period of time. For example, my 1st workout, which included arms, brought my arms up 1/4", after being stuck at the same size for nearly 4-5 months. Power Factor Training makes me feel extremely strong, in and out of the gym, gives me tremendous pumps, and is helping me reach my genetic potential faster than I could ever dream of with conventional training.

Sisco and Little adopted the Mentzer principles with working out once every 4-7 days, which I thought was absurd until I tried it. Every workout you come back stronger--every time. For someone who thinks you need to train 3-5 times per week to build muscle, you need to re-evaluate your current situation.

I firmly believe this is one of the most valuable books ever written about training, and I would recommend it to anyone I come across. Do take into consideration that you MUST read this book thoroughly, perhaps even 2-4 times to get the grasp of the points they are trying to get across. Do this, and fully expect to gain 15-30 lbs. of muscle in a few short months.

I find this book, written by a follower of the late great Mike Mentzer to be the best method for producing the most muscle in the least amount of workout time. The partial rep method also prevents injuries associated with full-rep joint-stressing movements. For maximum muscle size it makes sense that you must incorporate all fibers (Fast twitch, slow twitch, med twitch), and all fibers are not recruited until the last few inches of the rep. I also think that it is counter productive to tear down a muscle before it is fully recovered, so the longer "rest" periods between workouts is most productive. You can build one heck of a Bruce Lee "2 inch punch" with this training! It is indeed scientific, as you can measure it accurately from workout to workout, and you can find your individual "sweet spot" by simply varying reps/frequency and then looking at the numbers. If you want endurance marathon training, then look elsewhere, but if you want super results, with less time in the gym, this is a great read! :)

Bill O'Reilly will be the first to tell you that he doesn't want you to know what side of the fence is is on. In this book, he says he wants you to read the book and be even more uncertain about his political leanings when you are finished. I have come away thinking he's a registered Independent, but I'm not certain. That's one of the great things about this book.

I didn't agree with everything he had to say, especially about religion. But that's the thing I like about Bill O'Reilly- he doesn't toe any one party line, and I do disagree with him sometimes. I also agree with him a lot, mainly because I do feel that he is trying to get the truth about situations out to the public. I'm glad he isn't afraid to speak his mind about things. He gets a lot of heat about it, but that's what makes him such a unique person in the media- he tells it like it is. Sometimes the truth hurts, and a lot of people can't take that, and that's evident in the viewer mail he shares with the reader in the book.

Some of the parts of the book are silly, like his list of favorite things (like movies), so it's not all political.

So, if you like an intellectual challenge, read this book. No matter if you're liberal, conservative, or on your own, you will think while you read. If you don't like Bill O'Reilly, that's an even better reason to read. At least you can get a picture on where he's coming from.

Read THE O'REILLY FACTOR: THE GOOD, THE BAD, AND THE
COMPLETELY RIDICULOUS IN AMERICAN LIFE by bill o'reilly,
host of Fox News Channel's THE O'REILLY FACTOR . . . have you
ever seen his show? I haven't, but would like to after reading his best-selling book . . . he's one very opinionated guy, but I found myself agreeing with a lot of what he wrote . . . for example, he talks about one way to solve the drug problem is to have a forced rehab program like Alabama has . . . there, all prisoners are tested as soon as they're booked . . . all convicted suspects are given a choice: forced drug rehab in a prison drug facility or a longer sentence with the
general prison population . . . of the 5,000 participants so far, twice as many criminals stay off drugs upon release than those without rehab (and they must submit to regular drug testing for years after release).

There were many memorable passages; among them:
It's time that we all lighten up about sex, accept the reality of
the situation, and keep our secular activities where they belong:
in the privacy of the bedroom or hot tub, or in the case of
Pamela Anderson, on the Internet.

Here's the most important thing you need to know for success:
Identify your true talents. We're all born with a grab bag of
gifts . . . Think deeply about yours; identify them clearly; then
find out how to use them to make money!

Of course, we need it [money], but enjoying a job is worth plenty,too. If you look forward to going to work when you wake up in the morning, you are a success, no matter what your job description. Do you envy the guys and gals with the huge houses out in the suburbs and exurbs? How about their two- or three-hour commutes in the mornings and the evenings? And how about the "big nuts" of taxes, mortgages, private school fees and all the rest that require them to keep their heads down and play the corporate games,losing their dignity so they won't lose their mock-Tudor homes? Sometimes, having money costs too much.

I love this book! It's funny, easy to read, clever, but most impotanly, it's truthful. Bill says it like it is (MOST of the time) and deserves alot of credit. Unlike the annoyingly whinny liberals in this country, he gets things done! He's a good American and a fine human being. He is our friend.

I couldn't help but laugh while reading all of the negative reviews for this book. No wonder the left has lost so much power in this country! All I can say is keep on talking! Your foul liberal mouths only hurt you, and if it's your dirty mouths that keeps you out of power... I'm all for it. So please, keep talking! Keep whining and complaining like you always do. WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA! WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!

Just another Dr. scared away from her profession because of aids. Now she harps her barley grass in a bottle on her websites and lies about those she cured and her own diagnosis. You'd think she would have thousands of testimonials, but dead people can't talk. She is counting on the medically uneducated as her key for success.

I wish everyone in this country would wake up and start realizing what is happening. If you think that Dr. Day is full of it, well read what Dr Len Horowitz has got to say about it. Our government really doesn't care about your well being. We are merely here for their agenda. If you go to look for the truth, it's right in front of you. Take a read of David Ickes- "the Biggest Secret" and get your eyes opened. Your ignorance, laziness and apathy is what our government thrives on. If you think we live in a free country, do some research into the "Virginia Company" which owned by the Queen. You will find that She actually owns the united states of America.

If you're one of the minority of people who believe the U.S. government would never lie, deceive, steal, conceal or murder to protect it's power or agenda, then you don't know much about history. You should also avoid this book because it will just get you all bent out of shape and angry.

On the other hand, if you're more open-minded, undecided or suspicious about the actions of the federal government, then this book is for you. Dr. Day is an intelligent, professional woman who throws light onto the reasons the U.S. government has acted the way it has about this deadly disease.

Read the book, think about it, then decide for yourself whether or not we are living up to the spirit of freedom and democracy this great country deserves.

Many of those who criticize Barefoot on this website demonstrate their inability to read carefully what his book actually says. One reviewer attempts to discredit Barefoot by saying "if your blood were that acidic you'd be dead", despite the fact that Barefoot clearly makes the same claim. (Interesting how Barefoot's detractors seem to have missed that section.) What Barefoot is actually speaking about is the pH level of other body fluids, such as saliva, whose pH levels can be affected by the body maintaining the blood pH level at normal.

I thought the book made a lot of sense. Even though I have always been in good health I started using this product several months ago with no negative side effects. Instead, I have experienced several benefits such as greater mental alertness, improved memory and higher energy level. Plus I haven't had so much as a cold since following his regimen.

When reading the various reviews of "Death By Diet" on this website take heed of one important fact: Many of those who praise Barefoot's research claim to have actually followed his coral calcium regimen, while none of those who disagree with him make the same claim. While everyone is entitled their own opinion, I tend to have more faith in those who speak from personal experience.

For all those skeptics out there Bob Barefoot never says coral calcium cures anything, but what he does state is that the body heals itself, if given the right ph chemistry. For the person that wrote the review on the FTC charges against Bob Barefoot and coral calcium...the charges against Bob Barefoot were ,in fact, dropped the next day after filing suit...they had no case against him and they knew it. The book itself is written poorly..he would have done better to have a ghost writer. People need to stop believing in pharmaceuticals to help all their illnesses, when there are natural ways of healing yourself.Bob Barefoot states this over and over in his book...and not one time does he make a statement that coral calcium cures anything. For those who are skeptic, if you test your ph and you find out you are acid..if you alkalize you will notice within in a couple of weeks an increase in your energy level and also you will start sleeping sounder and get that deep rem sleep, that is required for repairing your body. if you have acid reflux or gerd, your symptoms will be completely eliminated after 3-4 weeks..and astonishingly you can eat things like tomatoes, cucumbers, onion...and not get the heartburn. i watched my mom's health transform over a year, since she has been on it. she has no more arthritis pain in her hands and the acid reflux she had for 9 years was gone after taking the coral calcium for one month.she went from a 5.5 ph to a 6.5 and what a difference in her energy level and sleeping pattern, she was always a nite marrauder an now she sleeps like a baby.i watched my sister who had a high reading for her liver 3 times what was normal...her doctor took her off all vitamins and drugs and let her stay on the coral calcium only...after 4 months she had more tests that showed her liver readings came back to normal.she also went from a 5.5 ph to a 6.5, she also had acid reflux and now she doesn't , as long as her chemistry stays alkaline. so bottom line our bodies have the ability to heal themselves, if given the proper nutrients, vitamins and minerals...and calcium is essential for the healing to take place.in regards to the FTC suit, the large pharmaceutical corporations would love to see coral calcium go away, if you know what i mean. when you look at the cost of exp. nexium at $300 a month (this being a maintenance drug taken every month for the rest of your life) they stand to lose allot ,considering it's $20.00 a bottle for coral calcium. Bob Barefoot states a fact when he says that the large pharmaceutical corporations can't patent a vitamin or mineral, so they want nothing to do with it ,because there is no money in it.the pharmaceuticals are a $364 billion dollar a year industry.

I have yet to read the book, but I've been taking coral calcium for eleven months--though I have no interest in trying to sell it to anyone--you can buy it at the drug store or the health food store. Before I started I was consuming Tums like candy. Since I started I've had no Tums at all. I've also noticed a significant jump in my energy and ability to think. I've tried a number of other highly touted "cures" that did not produce these results, so this isn't a matter of the placebo effect. One thing I would not have expected was that I might be able to achieve an alkaline body with the diet that I was eating apart from coral calcium. For a variety of reasons it was almost entirely acid-producing after digestion. Yet recently I have had two separate confirmations that my body is in an extremely healthy alkaline condition. I am also struggling with problems of the need for spinal nerve regeneration and there is some evidence of progress. Those who believe that is impossible need to read Mind and Brain by Jeffrey Schwarz, as well as the recent New Yorker article on Christopher Reeve. The success of coral calcium reinforces the fact that while America has the best medical system in the world when it comes to emergency medical care it has one of the worst in almost every other respect. It is time more doctors started figuring out how to improve health rather than putting so much energy into trying to prevent others from doing so--most emphatically including their gullible patients. It does seem to be true that doctors kill more people than any other single factor except smoking, and that's not just because there are so many people being treated or so many drugs being used. Fortunately, ever larger numbers of doctors are beginning to realize that alternative medicine should be used in combination with traditional medicine in order to produce the best results.

Hey, let's all refer to the book's summary in our descriptions. That is very helpful.

I did not read this book, nor will I, and nor should you. You already know what you think about Bill O'Reilly, otherwise you probably wouldn't buy a book that explicitly sets out to bash him.

My advice is to buy Al Franken's Lying Liars if you agree with Mr. Hart, if only because it deals with a broader spectrum of Right-Wing vs. Left-Wing conspiracy theories. If you think this book will make you angry, go ahead and buy an Ann Coulter book. Honestly, a book about a single issue in the Liberal/Republican debate doesn't seem to satisfy the demands of the more polarized audiences out there.

Buy an angry book if you want, but buy one that goes a bit further than Bill O'Reilly.

I first heard of O'Reilly's show from my father-in-law who's one of the world's greater prudes. He showed me a few of O'Reilly's moralisms in one of the books the alleged unspinner markets. I read them then ignored them as I do most of what my father in law recommends.

But to hear O'Reilly on the tube! What is it about loudmouth windbags that appeals to people? Because that's all O'Reilly is.

To be honest, when I first saw this book advertised before it became available, I thought it would be thicker, a more "scholarly" documentary of what's wrong with O'Reilly. When I got it, I saw it wasn't that thick. It reminded me of some of those comedy manuals that made jokes of the inept rhetoric of Dan Quayle and George W. for example. So I opened it expecting to be disappointed. I wasn't.

The author does a pretty good job of refuting just about everything O'Reilly says. Billy boy claims he's not a conservative. But he says nothing positive about anyone remotely connected with the Democratic party, and nothing negative about right wing Republicans, not matter how outrageous the statement or act.

Yet O'Reilly still has the audacity to call his stands "unspin," where that's all he does but spin, spin, and spin some more for anything he chooses to believe in, any stand he chooses to make.

There's a lengthy section in which scores of O'Reilly's statements are listed, followed by an "Oh, Really?" in which the statement is always challenged, usually refuted.

There's an entire chapter dedicated to the many times O'Reilly has contradicted himself. And the section on the person on O'Reilly's show who had a relative die on 9/11, yet was opposed to the war is a gem! What O'Reilly said after the microphone was off is something that clearly contradicts any of the little moral platitudes Billy is forever shooting off.

By the way, what might be the antonym to "pinhead?" Because that's what the scholarly O'Reilly refers to anyone who might be audacious enough to disagree with him. And he, like a well-known and equally windy--and insubstantial--daytime radio "conservative", who, in fact, may be O'Reilly's political mentor, has mastered the art of simply tuning out those who disagree with him. When someone disputes him with simple things like FACTS, O'Reilly dismisses them all with, "Well, that's your opinion," and moves on.

Al Franken does a more amusing job of refuting O'Reilly but if you know anyone, father in law or other, who pays attention to this loudmouth, you might want to give them this book to put the guy in perspective.

Frankly, it's beyond me what appeals to anyone about the guy. I hope the people O'Reilly has on his show and whom he thinks he's defeating (because he has control over the show!) just refuse to appear with him any more. Then we'll be rid of O'Reilly's self praise (e.g., of awards he never received) and opinions based on nothing more than the fact that O'Reilly still has a breath.

I recently heard Bill O'Reilly on Terry Gross's FRESH AIR on NPR, and his behavior convinced me that he is either mentally ill or calculatingly manipulative. I tend to the latter. O'Reilly suddenly pretended to be outraged at what he alleged was unfair, biased questioning, but it was interesting that he allowed the interview to go on for 50 minutes, knowing that he was scheduled for a 55 minute time slot. It was obvious that he planned from the outset to blow up and get outraged, in order to have fodder for his own show. That was my impression at the time of the show, but my conviction has been consolidated by this book.

Bill O'Reilly depresses me, partly because who he is-a loutish, aggressive, rude, combative, uninformed bully-but partly about what he says about contemporary American politics. Several former high level Republican leaders-a former speaker of the house and a former senate majority leader(Bob Michel and Bob Dole)-have stated and lamented that a new aggressive, take-no-prisoners style began to emerge with the 1984 Congressional class, led by raucous, unpleasant individuals typified by Newt Gingrich. With Lee Atwater's leading the GOP, the Republicans took on a new hyper-aggressive, win-at-all-costs approach to politics. And with the emergence of pundits like Rush Limbaugh and billionaires like Richard Mellon Scaife funding hordes of ultra Right Wing organizations and projects, any semblance of gentility disappeared, with Right Wingers accusing Democrats of every conceivable crime, knowingly manufacturing untruths (such as multiple accusations against Dukakis in 1988), and then-during the Clinton years-unleashing an unrelenting deluge of absurd charges and innuendos. Bill O'Reilly is another piece of this Right wing strategy to slant and mold political thinking in America. O'Reilly's contribution is unique in that he pretends to being unbiased and independent, and by taking the outrageous step of calling his show the "No Spin Zone," whereas it is "All Spin, All the Time."

I am tremendously upset that a book like this is needed. It hasn't been a good year for O'Reilly. First, he made a fool of himself at a table discussion featuring Molly Ivins (who managed to stay above the fray) and Al Franken (who I normally like, but who did, I'm afraid, did bait O'Reilly some, with tremendous success, and O'Reilly, who was unable to control the situation like he does on his show when he shouts people down, was made to look rather absurd). Then he attempted to engineer a lawsuit to prevent the publication of Franken's LIES AND THE LYING LIARS WHO TELL THEM, only to lose when the judge laughed the lawsuit out of court, all of which caused Franken's book to skyrocket to the top of the NY Times Bestseller List. He then made a fool of himself on the Terry Gross interview (though I'm sure his followers will not take the time to hear the entire interview, and will buy his own "spin" on what happened, which is a travesty of what actually occurred-anyone doubting me should go to www.npr.org, look up the Fresh Air link, and listen to the whole interview). Finally, Peter Hart brings out this book, which competently documents O'Reilly's tactics, ploys, and struggles with the truth.

I don't enjoy books like this, though they are needed. The book does a more complete job than Franken or Joe Conason in his book BIG LIES of documenting O'Reilly's claims. I was already aware of the nature of his strategy, of attempting to portray himself as an independent, whereas he is, in fact, solidly to the Right (though not as far as Rush Limbaugh). Hart quotes Bishop John Spong (a writer I normally dislike enormously), who tells O'Reilly quite accurately on his show, "You're Rush Limbaugh with perfume." It is helpful to have an extensive list of O'Reilly's factual errors. It become pretty obvious that O'Reilly in general just doesn't have a very good grasp of the facts, but tends instead, despite his claims to being a journalist, has the political grasp of a guy arguing politics in a barbershop. In fact, I became impressed with the overall resemblance of his style of "debating" with that of Ronald Reagan. Reagan's strategy was, when trying to prove a point, to spout statistics or "facts" that tended to bolster his position, statistics or facts that no one would be likely to be able to challenge on the spot, but which turned out to be untrue upon a reexamination. Basically, O'Reilly "spouts" pseudo facts to prove his point, but does not later correct himself on any of his errors. One thing that disturbs me about the Right these days is how comfortable many of its supporters are with factual inaccuracy. How can O'Reilly maintain such a large audience when he has such a weak grasp of the truth?

At any rate, this book is valuable for calling O'Reilly to the carpet for his lamentable weaknesses as a journalist. But to me, these faults pale in comparison to his unpleasantness as a debater, his aggressiveness towards those he considers his enemies, and his rudeness.

According to the cover, this book is coauthored by Robert Ludlam and Gayle Lynds. From reading this book, I would guess that Lynds did most of the writing and Ludlum's name was used to sell more copies.

Robert Ludlum wasn't a genius and some of his books do have some problems. But, he was great at writing suspenseful, action packed stories. This book has none of the suspense or tension usually found in Ludlum's books. The action scenes aren't very exciting. It is also filled with cliched characters, such as the computer nerd and the retired covert operator.

One of the big problems with the Hades Factor is that you know who the bad guys are and what they are up to from the beginning. There is no mystery. The other big problem is that the ending is one big cliche.

A good contrast is the Sigma Protocol, Ludlum's last book, which was released at about the same time as the Hades Factor. The Sigma Protocol is a far superior book. It has all the elements that make a Ludlum book so enjoyable.

The warning is don't get these "co-authored" imitations of Ludlum. Seek out the real thing.

The Hades Factor is the first in a series written by Gayle Lynds with perhaps some creative input from the late Robert Ludlum. Lynds has crafted a suspenseful thriller with solid, though perhaps stereotypical characters, and a good story line, though the ending was not that strong.

Our band here consists of Smith, a soldier-doctor-medical researcher, his CIA agent almost-sister-in-law, his best friend from high school-millionaire computer geek, and an aging British secret agent, living alone in the California mountains with only a trained mountain cat for company and protection. This is the first in the Covert-One series, as the government decides to formalize this group after their stunning success here.

The protangonist, Smith, finds himself AWOL, on the run from Arab killers, set up by another high school friend, grieving over the murder of a fiancee and several colleagues, and seemingly on his own to contain the world's worst outbreak of a deadly virus. Also, it seems that the evil plot has been hatched by a conspiracy of greedy businessmen, government and military officials, that goes all the way to the pinnacle of power. And that is only the first two chapters.

Forunately, Smith manages to suppress his grieving, outrun the bad guys long enough to assemble his team in a armor plated Winnebago, and escape down a California logging trail. Here the team splits up with the commando and the geek heading east, hacking every computer on the trail of the criminals, while Smith heads to Iraq on the trail of the virus, where he meets up with Russell, the sister of his late fiancee.

Ultimately, the team determines that a pharmaceutical firm has been spreading the virus for many years, simultaneously developing and stockpiling the vaccine, in order to prosper from the worldwide disaster they created. The science and technology descriptions are masterfully revealed, a true strength of both Ludlum and Lynds. Finally, this thing comes to a rather weak conclusion, with the perpetrators being revealed and caught in a formulaic fashion.

Despite being a long-term Ludlum fan, I had previously been hesitant to jump into the Covert One series. This changed when I picked up Cassandra Compact in an airport bookstore. Having enjoyed Cassandra Compact, I decided to go back to the beginning of the series. With The Hades Factor, I was not disappointed. The tale, although lighter and clearly not nearly as complex as the typical Ludlum, kept me turning the pages. This book, which grabs the reader early and does not let go, contains much of the suspense and plot twists that Ludlum aficionados have come to love in the conspiracy-thriller genre. If you are considering picking up the Covert One books, I would recommend starting with The Hades Factor. It is a very quick read and provides a nice foundation in terms of character building for future works in the series.

Everything you would want to know about your fertility. The chapters are detailed and gave me the kind of information to target my most fertile time.

I suffer from infertility and endometriosis. The latest edition of "Getting Pregnant" is excellent and a huge improvement from the last edition. It has been completely revised and updated for the millenium with all of the latest information on infertility treatment and fertility procedures. I feel that this would be one of the most helpful books for anyone who is trying to get pregnant (and I own A LOT of fertility books). I also consider this to be a great source of information for couples who are suffering from infertility.

The 2000 edition contains a bunch of new information and is twice the size of the 1992 edition. It includes the more "advanced" fertility info on immune disorders, male infertility, diet & "fertility foods", preventing miscarriage, new fertility surgeries, latest on high-tech fertility procedures, latest on fertility drugs and as well as the more basic information on how to increase your chances of conceiving, etc. (stuff for "beginners").

I finally did conceive last month, but I sadly miscarried 2 weeks ago. I was looking for pregnancy loss books, when I noticed that my "Getting Pregnant" book had been updated. I decided to purchase this book instead of a miscarriage book. I am really glad I did! It has helped me look forward to resuming my infertility treatment so I can try to get pregnant again. I am also looking forward to discussing many of the things that I learned from this book with my Reproductive Endocrinologist at our next consultation.

I really appreciate how encouraging Dr. Laurensen is. He is positive and upbeat, while remaining realistic. I am going through a really difficult time right now and this book has "lifted my spirits" a little bit. The book is also very easy to read, eventhough it covers some very technical stuff. It is very "reader-friendly"!

Much thanks to Dr. Laurensen and Ms. Bouchez for revising and updating their book!

My husband and I purchased this book while we were undergoing fertility treatments for "unexplained" infertility. The doctors had no other explanation for why two otherwise healthy people would be having problems conceiving naturally. I found this book full of information in laymen terms without all the medical jargon which can be boring and hard to understand. I wanted to be a better informed patient and be able to make responsible decisions regarding what treatments we were going to have. Getting Pregnant tells us about environmental factors, personal habits, and all the treatments that's available as well as general information for couples who are not experiencing infertility. I was surprised to read some of the unfavorable comments left by other readers. It is extremely draining physically and emotionally having to deal with infertility and everyone should take what they read with a grain of salt. I am happy to say that we had a beautiful baby girl while waiting for an IVF cycle and I guess that's where the "unexplained" comes in again. In all this book is well worth the read.

The book by Gelernter starts out very strongly. In the first few chapters, his arguments and facts are astounding and sometimes positively surprising. His line of thought in some spots is just as elegant as some of the subjects he describes in this paper.

Somehow, he lost his very own beauty in the fourth chapter. He ventures into one of the most un-elegant discussions of Mac History and the long lost fight against rival Microsoft.

To make things worse, he continues into a boring discussion and promotion of his own software products. These are described to the most annoying detail, which moves Gelernter into the ranks of mediocre vacum-clearner-salesmanship.

I have hardly ever read a book that takes you to the great highs as Gelernter does and then send you into a 50 page free fall. Having proved his aqbility to write most elegant and interesting in the beginning, Gelernter should stop right there and package the last few chapters into a brochure of his company. The book is definitely not worth the $$$ spend on it.

David Gelernter should be commended for the ambitiousness of his thesis that science and technology are driven by beauty, or at least a particular kind of beauty, one that is often met with resistance. Basic Books thought enough of his claim to include this book in their MasterMinds series.

But his thesis is not so absurd. He builds his argument by looking at some examples of beautiful design, such as the Apple desktop, the Turing machine, and a 1930s Emerson radio. In the case of Apple, continuities between the artist and scientist are obvious. The original Mac programmers were so proud of their work that, like artists, they signed their names on the case molding. The Mac embodies Gelernter's definition of machine beauty-power married to simplicity.

Paradoxically, because the Mac is so easy to use, so elegantly designed, it is still seen as less powerful, less serious, not the sort of thing appropriate to the corporate world. "Cute" is the word that greeted the first Mac; mockery followed the imac, with its candy-colors, translucent plastic, and rounded corners; shock and disgust arose over the imacs with Flower Power and Blue Dalmatian patterns on their cases. The tangerine iBook was compared to a Barbie purse. Put simply, elegance is considered effeminate. The tech reporters are so ignorant on these matters, on the importance of the aesthetic, on anything beyond the utilitarian, that Apple's innovations are giving them a collective coronary. Variety is, apparently, too much for them.

Gelernter argues persuasively that Apple's desktop interface is an example of beauty winning in the end. The Mac's graphical interface is on practically everyone's screen, having been stolen by Microsoft and grafted onto the ubiquitous Windows. I would add that the imacs, which arrived after this book was published, have been tremendously popular and have spawned numerous imitators, not just in computers, but in a rainbow of translucent, candy-colored appliances and consumer electronics.

But beauty doesn't always win. If by winning, Gelernter means the creation of superior technology, then he is correct. An approach which is merely mechanical, focusing on technique alone, will not produce excellence. But if by winning, he means chosen by the public, that isn't always true. No culture that makes money the arbiter of every decision is going to produce a Chartres cathedral or to revere it. It's lucky to produce a VCR that records what it is supposed to. A democratic culture is more likely to produce mediocrity. Americans in general are seen, and see themselves, as consumers, not as purveyors of beauty. As long as they are guided by the standard that cheaper is better, they will produce neither a product nor a service that can be considered excellent.

What is beauty? Gelernter, in a work that is more an
essay than full-blown book, does a wonderful job of
drawing the reader into exploring that question. He
asks, "...could a mathematical proof, scientific theory,
or piece of software be 'beautiful' in the real, literal
way that a painting or symphony or rose can be beautiful?"
The answer, according to Gelernter, is a resounding "Yes".

Machine beauty, a simple elegance that resonates in its
observer, is the subject of the work. But, how might one
sense this? Gelernter offers this: "You might experience
something resembling machine beauty, even if you are no
scientist or engineer, when you drive a nail into a
board with one clean, graceful hammer stroke." Precisely!

"Deep beauty, 'resonant beauty' in which many types of
loveliness reinforce one another, is a principal topic
of this book" according to the author. He then explores
the following two claims: (1) "...machine beauty is
the driving force behind technology and science", and
(2) "... machine beauty bothers us. We act as a society
as if our goal were not to nurture or celebrate it but
to stamp it out."

Gelernter, a computer scientist and sometimes artist,
applies his many observations to the sad state of today's
computer software. "The hell with mathematics; let's
teach of our programmers about beauty" he exclaims!

There are long running comparisons between the WinTel
PC and Apple Macintosh in the work. It isn't a "sales
pitch" for one or the other; just a set of observations
on how the emphasis (or deemphasis) of beauty and
elegance drove both efforts.

The work is easy to read yet fully researched. A "Notes"
section appears at the end of the 144 pages of prose to
provide all of the references to the other works Gelernter
drew upon. I thought the effort made to keep the meat of
the book uncluttered was well worthwhile.

This book is an excellent companion to Gelernter other
work "Mirror Worlds". Read Mirror Worlds first and then
eat this for dessert--you won't be disappointed.