Rating: 
Summary: A boilerplate review makes no sense
Review: The review of Perakh's book which originally was from a reader of Sunnivale, CA but now has mysteriously become a review from a reader from San Jose, CA, is very interesting in that it is a word-for-word copy of a review of a book by Forrest and Gross (titled Creationism's Trojan Horse) on the same Amazon site. Is it some boilerplate automatically applied to each book critical of Intelligent Design theory? Obviously, a replica of a review of a specific book cannot meaningfully relate to another book. Indeed, Perakh's book and that by Forrest and Gross are quite different in the authors' approach, the scope of material covered and style, although both books deserve high mark. Applying exactly the same review to both is a display of contempt for readers on the part of the person from San Jose (or was it Sunnivale?) Rather than to investigate which of the two books - that by Perakh or that by Forrest and Gross was the original target of the review in question, and for which of the two a copy was used, it seems more reasonable to conclude that the reader from San Jose (or Sunnivale?) hardly knows what he/she is talking about, perhaps having not even read either of the two books. The so-called review by the Sunnivale - San Jose reader is void of substance and does nothing to undermine the impact of Perakh's thorough and convincing argumentation that shows the emptiness of the ID concept. Five stars for Perakh, all rants of ID promoters notwithstanding.
Rating:
Summary: One more review to be send first
Review: The unsigned angry review from Waco shows the reviewer's bias The reader from Waco, Texas (where coincidentally -- or possibly not so coincidentally -- William Dembski is employed by Baylor University) prudently shies away from signing his spiteful review of Perakh's book and from indicating his email address. Offering no arguments to repudiate Perakh's analysis of the literary production of Dembski and Friends, this anonymous Waco resident instead pounces on the Prometheus Books Publishing House. Although the merits or shortcomings of Prometheus are irrelevant for a judgment of Perakh's discourse, in fact Prometheus has published scores of books by highly qualified writers covering a wide scope of topics. On the other hand, Demsbki, Johnson, and their colleagues have many of their books published by InterVarsity Press, which is openly and extremely partisan in the selection of what it prints. Contrary to the opinion of the Waco resident, Perakh's book does indeed demolish the pseudo-scientific perorations of Dembski and Behe, not to mention the lawyerly diatribes by Johnson. Indeed, the very anger displayed by the reader from Waco testifies to the force of Perakh's analysis. I'd not be surprised to see more, similar assaults on Perakh from the ranks of neo-creationists, both from Waco and vicinity and from other locations as well, since, feeling uncomfortable after Perakh had shown the emptiness of their asseverations, they can be expected to feverishly try defending their indefensible position. I support those reviewers who (unlike Waco's resident, all have signed their reviews and) gave high mark to Perakh's book.
Rating: 
Summary: Science In The Eyes of a Scientist=Atheist
Review: This books is full of ideology and sparse on courtesy. Perakh attempts to play the part of the unbiased, cool, collected and rational scientist. Meanwhile, he casts his adversaries as "arrogant" "ingoramuses". Worse yet, he tries to undermine the work of Dembski and Behe by not so subtley equivocating their work with the work of Bible Coders and preachers. Perhaps one day we will see a book on intelligent design that deals squarely with the intellectual ideas. This is not that book. Not recommended.
Rating:
Summary: Codes decoded
Review: This is a rather thick volume and many words could be said about the interesting stuff one finds in its many chapters. While I like almost everything in this book (which, even if not perfect, is no more imperfect than could be expected from any book, however good) I'd like to emphasize the chapter about the Bible code. There are hundreds of websites and dozens of books about the codes, most of them in favor of the codes' authenticity. For the average reader, not versed in all the intricacies of this controversy, it is hard to analyze the endless sets of convoluted arguments proposed by the codes believers and their opponents. The chapter in Perakh's book has the advantage of presenting the codes controversy in a reasonably succinct but sufficiently clear manner, so even readers with limited backgrounds in this topic can comprehend the main features of the dispute and understand the gist of the arguments from both sides. Perakh himself is squarely on the side of skeptics and provides a number of quite persuasive arguments for his position. Although, as previous experience shows, the believers in codes can hardly be converted into skeptics regardless of the power of the arguments contrary to their beliefs, I find Perakh's argumentation very strong in showing the fallacy of the codes proposition. (The rest of the book is fine as well. I have enjoyed following the author's chains of logical steps and his reliance on facts.)
Rating:
Summary: ID Debunked
Review: This is a truly splendid book that exposes the errors about probability theory and statistical reasoning that have become the stock-in-trade of leading proponents of intelligent design theory. The book is all the more remarkable because Perakh has taken care to explain tricky mathematical concepts in ways that are highly accessible to the general public. As a consequence, anyone can now see how leading intelligent design theorists, like the well-known emperor, really have no clothes.
Rating:
Summary: This book says all as it is
Review: This is an eye-opening book. It reveals the fallaciousness of arguments of those many authors who so brazenly set out to prove that the story told in the book of Genesis is fully in harmony with science, if only the biblical story were properly interpreted. What transpires when reading Perakh's critique is that Ross, Schroeder, and others of their ilk, while stressing their PhD degrees, actually are much in dark regarding the facts of science. Therefore their defense of the Genesis story is on an abysmally amateurish level. Perakh, as far as I can judge, is not arguing against faith or religion but only debunks the specific arguments utilized by those Bible-inerrancy believers who simply are not qualified for the task. This is a much needed book which says all as it actually is and thus clears up the matter. Five well deserved stars.
Rating:
Summary: A book that is cleaning up the mess
Review: To anybody who wishes to keep abreast with the fight between ID advocates and their detractors this book is a must. I have used the word fight deliberately - the dispute in question is not much like a normal dispute in science but is often redolent of a skirmish between two street gangs. Though this book has its (small) share of emotional outbursts, on the whole is remarkable by its restrained tone as its author, whose sympathies clearly belong to the anti-ID camp, obviously intends to be as objective as possible. When his critique of errors by some of the writers who are objects of his debunking effort may sometimes sound quite harsh, it is usually simply a result of the gravity of their errors. It may be an unrewarding job to clean up the mess created by under-qualified contributors to the discussion, but this is a job which is necessary and I think we have to be grateful to Perakh for endeavoring to perform such cleansing. Given the emotional atmosphere in the fight between Intelligent Design and anti-ID groups, the tone of Perakh's book may in fact be judged to be quite moderate. The important point is, though, that Perakh's discourse, which reveals his extensive knowledge of the subject, is convincing throughout and ensures his book a rightful place among five-star choices.
Rating:
Summary: An Unnecessary Book
Review: Unintelligent Design is a book that should have not been written. Evolution has met every single scientific test. Creationism, and "intelligent design" is merely creationism under a different name, has failed every single scientific test. Any argument about the two should have been rendered moot decades ago. Alas, it is not to be as long as fools insist on simple answers to complex problems. Keith Taylor
Chula Vista, CA
Rating: 
Summary: On the attack
Review: With 30 reviews already present, why another? Because of this observation: the reviews of all books in the area of science vs. religion came with emotional baggage. Atheistic books are praised by atheists and religious books are praised by believers. There is almost no middle ground, essentially no books for agnostics. The result is then that the 'helpful' question at the end of a review really means, 'do you agree with the viewpoint,' not how well is the book done. The existing reviews bring up all the criticisms and the praiseworthy comments I could make. I agree with many of the author's observations. On the other hand, no matter how brilliant a scientist he appears to be, I find off-putting his self-serving examples of his 'brilliance', his snide remarks and his technique of pointing out an author's lack of knowledge when that missing information is of no consequence to the author's point of view. Destroying a writer's credibility is easier than wining a debate by logic. And in using that technique some information he presents is out-and-out wrong, just as he accuses other authors of inaccuracies. In his "Afterword" he presents himself as not agnostic, both religious faith and atheism being irrational, but as neutral. Still, all in all, an important read.
Rating:
Summary: Dembski's fraud exposed
Review: Yes, I use the word "fraud" deliberately, seeing Gary Hurd's review exposing Dembski's [...] of writing critical reviews of books like this under false names.
In fact, I found that worthy of a five-star rating by itself, and linked to it on my personal blog.
|
