effect

One of the stones around the neck of Darwinist evolutionary theory is that it hasn't been observed to happen.Thousands of years of intensive breeding of dogs (not even the undirected evolution Darwin described) hasn't produced a new species of non-dogs. Same with cats and other living things.

The way around the problem is to avoid defining what evolution is or broaden it to simply mean "change" so that anything that changes is said to evolve. Defined that way, evolution can be trumpeted every time a rock rolls down the hill.

It's sort of like AIDS in Africa. First you had to be tested and found to have HIV to be counted as an AIDS case. Well, it was hard to test, so instead AIDS was redefined to be a class of symptoms. If you had the symptoms, you were counted. Immediately after the redefinition of AIDS, the reports started about an explosion of AIDS in Africa.Now whenever the stats need to be cranked up, a commission meets to add new symptoms to the list and expand the pool of what can be called AIDS.

These are also the author's primary methods, used in the hope no one looks too closely at all the semantic shell games being played. At times evolution is used in a context which implies "change". Then there is a shift and the idea is blended without warning to mean speciation (Darwinism). Word meanings flip back and forth without distinction so credibility can clandestinely be transferred from what everyone knows to be true (genetic variation) to that which is unproven (Darwinian speciation).

The organisms that develop resistance to antibiotics are the same type of bacteria as before they developed resistance. They have not become a different kind of bacteria. Exposure to the solvent DMSO has made resistant bacteria again susceptible to the old antibiotics. The reason isn't certain, but it appears as if it might have something to do with an external coating rather than genetic coding. Inheriting a useful slime coat from a pool of bacteria (that reproduce by splitting) is now being trumpeted as evolution without evidence, just like AIDS is exploding in Africa without testing. An artifact of definition.

It's like how one might persistently catch colds until beginning to take vitamin C supplements. If I no longer catch colds, have I biologically evolved? The author would have you think so.

The actual criticism of Darwinism is directed at the claim new information (new species) can be developed by undirected natural selection. It just has not been observed to happen.

Now if you want to falsely represent the critics of Darwinism, you can define evolution to simply mean "change". Then every time there is change in a biological system -- bingo -- you can say it "evolved". And critics of Darwinism then can be made to appear foolish and ignorant by ignoring all the "evidence of evolution (change)" exploding around them. Deeply dishonest. Lousy thinking, lousy science.

Everyone is aware of genetic variation. Blonde and black-haired spouses may have brown-haired children; tall and short may produce children in-between, etc., etc. This is the biological equivalent of painting-between-the-lines; radically different from the production of new species and the origin of life.

The subject of antibiotic resistance is a serious and interesting one, but using it falsely to wrap around evolution as a disguising cover is disingenous; an act of propaganda, not science.

It is completely true that accepting genetic variation but not speciation is a failure of imagination. Imagination is simply not enough to do the job.

Speciation by natural selection is claimed to be a science, yet hasn't been observed,isn't repeatable and can't predict results. It's not science, but a philosophy of rationalization; it allows little stories to be constructed to explain why things are without regard to reality.

Darwinist start with the question "How do I want the universe to be?" and then determine truth to fit the answer. Actual science reverses the questions: "What is truth?" THEN "How shall we live?"

This excellently-done book explores the human tendency to cause explosive evolution in our environments. Don't believe in evolution? Note how effectively we've caused many disease organisms to evolve resistance to our best antibiotics, in the course of less than 100 years. Or the fact that all of our food and pets have been selectively bred to exacting standards for more than 10,000 years. If we hadn't accelerated the evolution of maize, we'd still be eating cobs less than an inch long, you know. So there. And to counter your arguments: yes, selective breeding is too evolution. It's evolution by artificial selection, which is a perfectly valid mechanism. So there again.

Palumbi is both a colorful and informative writer. He spends a lot of time discussing HIV, and why it's so hard to beat (it mutates constantly, overwhelming the immune system). I would have liked a more in-depth discussion about whether humans are still evolving or not -- I think we are -- but he only touched on that subject. Nonetheless, highly recommended.

This is a great read. Steven Palumbi shows everyone why evolution matters today in real and meaning ful ways.
Two quotes from the book
".. the best education is the one that bites back, the one that shows with clarity of glacial ice that the facts and principles of the scientific world are of crucial importance to every day life.... not through eclectic recourse to scientific theory or historical anecdote. Instead, I need to do it through examples about how evolution in the world around us matters."

And why does it matter: " And if antibiotic resistance just happens, then we have no notion of how it comes to be, and no real chance to block the rise of some of the world's deadliest forms of life. But if something evolves, then the science of evolution can chart the answer to why, and perhaps prevent or change it."

This book is full of uninspiring projects and poor editing. Tons of typos, and writing that just doesn't make sense in the least. I'm very surprised someone edited this at all.

It was up for sale again not long after I got it.

Adam Phillip's chapter stands out in this valuable book. Finally, advice from a real professional(Disney) animator. Well respected as a character, special effects and Flash animator, Adam's advice is invaluable to anyone seeking to animate in Flash.

i fenk tihs bok is so kool 4 sk00l i giv fiev starz cos it iz good.

i aelso fink flash iz fuhn + awsum x 9

<3 (osupsons)

- mucks

We don't need to see the Little Mermaid's nipples.
(I can never understand why the people who cry out that the nudity is "JUST art!" don't notice that it is never underdressed males, but little girls that we have to look at.)

Amazon.com rates this book for ages 4 - 8, but the text is difficult and violent, and the admittedly lovely art is appropriate for graphic novels in the _Sandman_ vein, not for kids.

Yes, it is a lovely story, yes, it was dark to begin with, and no it is not a children's book.

Good translation, pretty (aside from the gratuitousness) illustrations earn 2 stars.

Sulamith Wulfing's art is gorgeous! Unfortunately, most of the reviews I see here are NOT for her book! They are reviews of the version Rachel Isadora illustrated (see the "nipples" and violence comments); or even for Disney's Little Golden Book adapted from the cartoon. I don't understand why reviews for other versions are displayed here; it's very misleading! If you like Sulamith Wulfing's art, you'll probably like this book.

The Little Mermaid. Illustrated by Sulamith Wulfing; text by Hans Christian Andersen. Translated from the German by Petra Michel.

Sulamith Wulfing is a fantastic artist whose work has been sold as books of plates, calendars, and even decks of cards. This book is special because it is one of the few times that her works illustrate a story. Each page has black and white line drawings and there are ten full page color plates. The color plates are the type of work for which the artist is most known and the ten in this book have been reprinted in her calendars and other collected works. The color is vibrant and the themes of each are sublime. The cover illustration is also the last illustration in the text and shows the mermaid transformed into The Immortal Soul.

An epilog called "The Sacrifice" written by the artist's son, Otto Schulze, states that a new translation of Andersen's story was used and that "parts of the story have been summarized." While staying true to Andersen's original plot, incidents and characters have been left out and parts of the story have been changed. These changes raise the story above being a children's fairy tale and highlight its allegorical theme about the role of love in the quest for immortality. The modified text and the mystical art go together excellently to make this the best rendering of this story I have ever seen. Originally published in German in 1953, this work is as vibrant today as when it was first conceived 50 years ago.

At the end of the book is a brief one page biography of the author with an early photograph of her and a self portrait painted in 1953.

"As a a pastor serving in a parish setting and as a family therapist, I have found Carol Falkowski's guidebook "Dangerous Drugs," an excellent resource in my work with conflicted families. It is practical, down to earth, easily understandable and up-to-date, a great book for anyone working with crisis situations in today's pervasive drug culture. I highly recommend it and give it 5 stars!"

This book gives a clear, informative, and balanced portrayal of "what's up" on the current drug scene -- helps a parent, or anyone, better understand the daily flood of drug news in the media, or what we encounter first hand.

We parents know the drug scene has changed since our high school years, and we need a good, easily read, reference and fact book to bring us up to date. This second edition of Dangerous Drugs serves that need perfectly. Keeps us from just standing there "clueless" while our kids face the ever-changing and growing problem of drug abuse every day.

The color photos of drugs and drug equipment are very helpful, as are the charts at the beginning of each chapter.

EVERYONE concerned about the issues of drug abuse should read this book!

I very much enjoy Carol's book: Dangerous Drugs. I have been working in the human services, substance abuse, corrections fields for more than 25-years. I have been working with young people since 1984. I am a public speaker, traveling thoughout North America speaking with both children and adults about drug prevention. I am an avid reader and researcher. I think this is an excellent, inexpensive, up-to-date reference guide for parents. I am always looking for resources to recommend to parents when they ask me, "What do you recommend? How can I learn about what's available to my kids?"

I find that most parents just don't have the "savy" and time to research "what's what" in the street drug arena. I've found Carol's book to "fit the bill to a T!" For the most part, concerned parents "just want to know what in the heck is going on." They see lots of information on TV, in the newspaper, magazines. They get overwhelmed and overloaded. They don't know how to put all of the pieces together. They get easily confused "Dangerous Drugs: An Easy to Use Reference for Parents and Professionals" does exactly that! It provides straight-forward, easy-to-understand information about drugs.

Sure, there are other books that delve deeper into some of the drug classifications highlighted in Carol's book. Sure, there are certain individuals who can argue whether Carol is using "scare tactics and half truths." But . . . I'm familiar with Carol's work. She is an avid researcher. She believes in giving accurate information. I find this book to have accurate information from cover-to-cover.

If you want an easy-to-use, factual, up-to-date reference guide for understanding drugs of abuse, this is the book for you. I highly recommend it. Don't take my word for it, next time you see a copy of the book, browse through it. I guarantee you will become engrossed. And you can rest assured that Carol carefully researched each and everything she writes about. I think her integrity is next to none. I've got a copy on my desk.

Happy reading!

In his new book, From Naked Ape to Superspecies, David Suzuki explores a myriad of topics of profound importance. The environment is his central theme, though there are are chapters on genetic engineering, globalisation, and environmental activisim. Like other authors before him, Suzuki is deeply concerned about the current nature of the world. Biodiversity is threatened, cultural diversity is diminisihing with the onslaught of globalisation, and our very health and well-being are potentially in danger from genetically-modified (GM)food. Each of these topics is explained through the viewpoint of numerous experts in the various fields, as the book is based on a radio series which interviewed many people.

For a student of biological science, the book was real eye-opener as it exposed me to many of the ramifications of broad issues I had previously taken little notice of. I knew little of globalisation, now I think I know enough to be able to form an opinion. Same for GM food. I had not realised that Suzuki was so green, but he clearly has an active interest in the perhaps not-so-scientific side of environmentalism. He is a wise man who deserves to receive ample attention.

Overall, I found the book to be highly interesting and thought-provoking, and I recommend it to anyone with a more than a passing interest in the environment and other portentous issues. I have no criticisms to make, besides the fact that little written material seems to be referred to. As a result, the accuracy of some his comments must necessarily come under suscipician. This, however, should not detract from the overall superior quality of the book.

SUZUKI:

Although David Suzuki was trained to genetically engineer fruit flies to grow arms from their heads, his perspective on science and life is remarkably human. I would go so far as to say that his understanding of humanity and its place in nature is perhaps unequaled among environmental philosophers today. Aside from working as a scientist, Suzuki also spent some 30-some years producing nature documentaries. This gave him the opportunity travel the globe, visit many different cultures and geographic regions, from indigenous tribes to povrety-striken Third World nations. It was through profound cultural education that Suzuki unlearned the mad science he studied as a youth and gained new understand about culture, economics and biodiversity. Nowadays, Suzuki mainly spends his time writing books and articles. He also runs an environmental organization in Canada, where he and his family live, called the David Suzuki Foundation. The website address is: http://www.davidsuzuki.org/

DESCRIPTION OF THE BOOK:

In this book Suzuki teams up with writer and researcher Holly Dressel to produce a sort of global guide to the biosphere-a work of scope and detail that will amaze you. They will walk you through ancient arboreal forests and the global economy with the ease of an experienced mountain tracker. They will be introduced you to people and movements that are sure to move. And perhaps most importantly the book will provide you with an important ecological perspective. Filled with stories, anecdotes, interesting facts, and tons of suggestions and references, from books to organizations - "From Naked Ape to Super-Species" is nothing less than a manual for humanity. Simply put, this is one of the most important books I have read.

EXERPT:

"Time is the one ingredient that is absolutely for vital for nature. It is the vast sweep of evolutionary time that has allowed life to flourish and huge changes to occur. In the 4 billion years that life has existed, the sun has increased in intensity by 25 percent, magnetic poles have switched and reversed back, continents have smashed into each other and then pulled apart, ice ages and warm periods have come and gone, and the atmosphere has been transformed from a non-oxygen to a oxygen-rich one. Yet life has persisted, simply because of the immense periods of time it has to make adjustments.

Today, the rate at which we are extracting trees, fish, topsoil and clean water, as well as creating pollutants and greenhouse gases, may match the speed of information technology and the economy, but it is not in synch with the reproductive rates of natural systems. More and more, our sources of information are no longer connected to the natural world and its limits. Politics, civic action and participatory democracy need time too. Democratic groups like PTAs and other voluntary human institutions take time to do their work.

Until we slow down the rate of growth in information and technology and learn to pay attention to the true pace of the non-technological planet, we'll keep making unrealistic demands that can't be fulfilled. At the very least, we need to understand that our accelerated rates of production and use of human-made technical information function at a completely different pace from that of the natural rates of information exchange, like those I experienced in the Brazilian rain forest."

MAIN ISSUES:

General Environment Issuses: from the toxification of our environment to Environmental Justice.

Consumer Issues: How do our shopping habits effect the world aroud us?

The Question of Progress: What does it mean?

Food Issues and Biotechnology: In Canada, America, the world abroad.

Globalization Issues: Impacts at home and abroad

Global Warming and Forest Issues

Non-Violent Direct Actions: some groups and individuals fighting against large international corporations for local sovereignty

Human Rights, Environmental Rights

I encountered this book first on tape, and have now ordered a copy for my town library, another for a faculty member at Norwich University who chairs a committee that makes an annual Earth Stewardship Prize award to students/faculty, and one for the Environment bookshelf in my own library. Unfortunately, this is a message that is far too late, but " better late than never". Those who think that simply expanding world trade, or consuming as usual, or that technology will save us from the results of human predation and exploitation of the ecosystem of the planet, or that there is no real global warming, or that the world can sustain an unlimited human population are the ones who MUST read this book. Yes, the earth will recover from what we humans are doing to it , but there won't be any of our (highly endangered) species around to find out what the world will look like then!

When I read this book for my college environmental science class, I thought it was fascinating and ground-breaking. Picking it up 6 years later, however, I realize how much is missing. I re-read the first chapter on Easter Island, and wondered, "where is the account of disease?" Contrary to Ponting's claims, the Easter Island civilization did NOT collapse as a result of over-use of resources! In fact, it recovered from this mistake, only to be devastated by syphilis and small pox, brought by the Europeans.

Instead of using Easter Island as a warning to the rest of the world, Ponting should use it as a message of hope. If Easter Islanders could recover from severe resource degradation- so could we. The key is recognizing the problem in time and working actively to resolve it.

Clive Ponting's book provides a very good introduction to the subject. It is well written and serves as an excellent starting point, introducing the important questions and providing thought provoking conclusions.

Comments that the book is inaccurate regarding Easter Island are illogical. As Ponting points out, the very first Europeans to arrive on the island found a society already devastated by the environmental degradation that it failed to prevent. The diseases inadvertantly spread to the Easter Islanders through this first European contact were not a primary cause of the downfall of the island civilization.

Clive Ponting's subtitle is slightly misleading, as this book is less about the history of civilization's collapse than a history of civilization's influence on the environment. This is a thorough and interesting study of how humans have changed or damaged their natural surroundings from the earliest hunter-gatherer days through the modern post-Industrial world. It seems that any modification of the environment has unintended and unexpected consequences down the road. Of course in the past few had the time or the vision to anticipate these consequences, and we are now living with the results of centuries of pollution, salinization, and general degradation. This is not a polemic but a well-argued study which asks us to consider whether our effect on the natural world has been more for good or ill. It is a good precursor to ideas later developed further in Jared Diamond's Guns, Germs, and Steel, among others.

Talk about a recap, the first 161 pages were taken word for word from the previous book. I was very disappointed, and wanted my money back. He redeems himself with the next two Bannerman books.

After reading the "Bannerman Solution" I found this book to be a dissapointment. The first part of the book was a repeat of the previous book the "Bannerman Solution". It was like rereading the first book the "Bannerman Solution". I was also dissapointed that the Ripper Effect was never fully implemented. This could have made this book a better read. This also caused the book to fall short. The usual cast of characters alone saved this book.Thank god we had Billy,Carla,Anton,Lesko,Elena and company to fall back on. I was also dissapointed about the lightweight villains thar were featured in the "Bannerman Effect". Maxim could have done better here also. I am going to read more of the Bannerman books and hope that they get better.

One reader claimed that the first 161 pages were a verbatim recap of the previous Bannerman book. That doesn't begin to be true. There is a recap, but almost none of it is verbatim because that action is seen from different, often sinister points of view by characters who made their first appearance in this book. The editor thought the recap was needed because this would be the first Bannerman book for many readers, and, because even the readers of the first one probably needed a reminder of who's who after waiting 18 months for this one to be published. The book was very favorably reviewed by people who had less trouble understanding that it's not so easy to do a sequal that balances the expectations of both old and new readers.

This guy simply does not know what he's talking about. Having read some of the scientific articles the author sites, I am disgusted with his lack of comprehension. Like other conspiracy theorists, he takes a few out of context factoids and stretches them to fit his ideas.

This is a good bookwith a good start for parents to get there hands on to help inform and prepare them to make a good decision. It is easy to read and full of facts and some opinions and experiences. This is a good book to read but if you want scientific data presented on BOTH sides of the issue, with point and counter point facts then read Vaccines: Are They Really Safe and Effective? By Neil Z. Miller. If you are going to read multiple books be sure to pick up The Vaccine Guide: Risks and Benefits but if you are only going to read one book make it Vaccines: Are They Really Safe and Effective.

This book does what others don't. Most books and articles offer opinions. This book provides logical discussion with verifiable sources of all data and studies quoted. Writing is clear, comprehensive, and balanced. Read the book, verify the sources if you like, then come to your own conclusions.

Gale Christianson has made the science of global warming and climate change accessible to the general public with his book "Greenhouse." He has a knack for bringing the quirky personalities of the many scientists involved in the discovery of the greenhouse effect to life. He helps the reader easily understand the significance of each scientist's contribution and makes their scientific inquiries read like a great mystery novel.

Gale's synthesis of material is creative. He includes the story of the Anasazi of the American southwest, the Viking settlement in Greenland and others when discussing the impact changing climactic conditions have had on humans in the past. The author includes profiles of scientists who theorized and then later documented the greenhouse effect (such as Svante Arrhenius) as well as the entrepreneurs whose inventions have contributed significantly to the problem (such as Ford).

The author addresses the issue of why the earth experienced a slight cooling trend from the 1940s to the early 1970s, prior to the more recent period of steadily rising temperatures: the period in question witnessed twice the normal amount of volcanic activity, which helped block sunlight from reaching the earth.

The evidence cited by the author strongly suggests that the earth is warming due to human activity. Yet, Christianson inexplicably accords the well-known greenhouse skeptic Fred Singer's criticisms of greenhouse theory more respect than this coal and oil industry-funded mouthpiece deserves. If the author did this in order to appear objective, he did so at the cost of confusing corporate propaganda with real science.

In fact, my criticism of the book is that it contains precious little analysis. Christianson is a gifted storyteller, and no doubt many will enjoy his entertaining narrative. But the reader who seeks insight and understanding into why our society privileges technology at the expense of nature will need to look elsewhere.

Still, I think Christianson has succeeded in his mission of writing a great book for the general interest science reader. It should help further the cause of making the science of global warming an increasingly popular topic of conversation in our society.

I highly recommend this well-written, exhaustively researched history of global warming. The author takes us on the path of energy use by Western societies, in particular Britain and Europe, that began about 200 years ago with the insatiable burning of coal. Back then, for a while, at least, people acted out of ignorance when it came to consuming carbon-generating energy sources, although the asphyxiating fogs that beset some British cities ought to have been a wake-up call at the time. Today, according to the author (and I agree), there is sufficient evidence that we are continuing to warm the planet at an alarming, unsustainable rate. Christianson offers a balanced, intellectual rather than emotional treatment of the greenhouse gas emission issues. I pray that at least some of the world's leaders in government and industry read this book, or allow themselves to be influenced by others who accept Christianson's story and what it portends.

Gale Christianson gives a wonderful, dynamic historical account of global warming. Gale addresses so many aspects of the controversy we now know as global warming its difficult to summarize them. She explores 16th and 17th century scientists and their discoveries about the world, from evolution to the impacts of pollution, to the creation of the coal-burning engines that caused England to erect higher and higher smokestacks believing that the smoke would simply float away into the atmosphere. Gale also speaks of the global climate changes that have occurred across the history of humankind as we know it. She explains the tortuous trip that brought the Vikings to settle in Greenland, and the climate shifts that ceased their existence on the frosty continent. She explores the history of the Anasazi and the changes in their biospheres that chased them from their homes built high in the Southwestern US. Gale explains all the differing theories that address the effects of global warming, ending with the fact that we don't really know what the impact will be in the future. She dialogues the negotiations that occurred in Kyoto Japan and the political atmosphere that makes reductions in emissions so difficult. A wonderful account, reads like a novel with dynamic characters, interesting plot changes, and mysteries that may never be solved. Although it does not bring to light anything new to explain global warming, it is a superb overview of global warming as we know it, and why it is such a controversy today.

Even if publications like this are not written by millionaires, surely that's the audience they intend to reach. I can't blame the conservative public for wanting a rebuttal to assertions on issues such as environmentalism, civil liberties, racism, etc. that leftists might seem to have monopolized in the public consciousness. No position should go unchallenged as incontrovertible fact, especially not if the proof is so difficult to ascertain, as it is with global warming.

In reading books like this and Facts Not Fear: Teaching Children About the Environment, you get the feeling that conservative types see today's environmentalist establishment as some unpleasant amalgam of mamby-pamby peaceniks and humorless grown-up hall monitor killjoys who arbitrarily claimed authoritatively to know what is best for the planet. From the former's standpoint, all that was thought to be good and wholesome not so long ago (like red meat, driving, farming) has since been villified. What is a red-blooded American to do?

What makes books like these disappointing is the low road they seem to prefer. Not all environmentalists strive to kill the dreaded multinationals, spike trees and take away your driving privileges. Those that do tend to inflate figures and resort to scare tactics, but aren't likely to appeal to the better educated public. If it is necessary to inform the public that there is an alternate school of thought on ecology, the best way to present it is probably not to suggest that we are all living well, so let's just ignore the fact that 3 of the 10 most polluted locales in the world belong to the US. It seems that when the Right finally does get the microphone to present commentary on the state of the environment, instead of articulating, it chooses to play armpit noises. It might play to more of the audience, but only because it takes the seriousness out of an issue that the angry or insipid masses don't want to be bothered with. At least not until an environmental disaster hits them personally.

Academia probably won't have much use for Simon's work in this lifetime, but it doubtlessly has, and will have, an audience. If his purpose was just to preach to the choir, he succeeds, but it's not likely to reach beyond. It's disappointing, though, that this type of perspective represents so much money, yet all these resources cannot buy more informed, or at least persuasive authors.

Simon does his usual thing in this book as he debunks the bunked-up balderdash of the blinkered. His "Ultimate Resource" book, his book on "the State of Humanity" and his posthumous offering, "It's Getting Better All the Time" with Stephan Moore, all converge with the theme of exposing the political agenda under which the progressive Left operates as they disguise their true motives while waving their banner of concern for the environment. The recent publication by Bjorn Lomborg, "the Skeptical Environmentalist", just adds more fuel to Simon's fire. Lomborg has impeccable Leftist credentials as a former member of Greenpeace who also works as a professor in the political science department of a Danish University. He's just that oddity of oddities, an honest Leftist intellectual.

Lomborg set out to prove Simon wrong, but found him to be...drumroll...., to in fact, be right. Lomborg's shock parallels Ron Radosh's experience in setting out to prove the Rosenbergs innocent, but in fact finding that they were guilty. Both men have received scorn at the hands of the Far Left. They are made to be an un-person in true Stalinist style as they suffer the dispersement of disinformation at the hands of their former comrades. The rabbit is out of the hat, as Simon has always known, it's a political agenda that fuels almost all the environmental scare tactics of the Left and in no way does their agenda resemble a search for the truth.

Simon and Lomborg both used statistics and science, freely available in the public domain, leading Lomborg to question why so many environmental myths are so truculently lodged in the minds of the public? Just as Simon talks about the need for a "Truth Lobby" Lomborg was amazed at the closed minded religiosity of his friends who refused to believe, nor had an interest in discussing, his research findings. It is this compartmentalized-brain-syndrome that has consigned Simon's works to the dustbins of bookstores who continue to extol the virtues of always wrong, but presumably well intentioned, environmentalists such as Paul Erhlich of Stanford.

If we are fortunate enough to have a collective national awakening it will probably be because Simon's work, like Bach's music, will have been discovered at some later date in a more rational time in some collectors trunk in an attic, deep in the heart of the land of the fruits and the nuts.

It should be quite obvious to anyone with any real background in natural science, math, or perhaps just good old, non-hysterical common sense, that the earth isn't coming to an end. This book completely refutes the reasoning of the 1990s trend of screaming at "big business" for "destroying the planet". Face it folks, just 'cause Al Gore claims it's true, doesn't make it so. Global warming...Am I the only one who remembers the mid-1970s panic over "global cooling"? Back then, we were all going to die in a new ice age. People need to be scared about something new every 25 years or so. It seems to give them an excuse for their righteous rage, when all they really need is a couple of Prozac.