Sunday, January 13, 2008

In Praise of Science Books

The author of this article makes a rather valid point. Where are all those science books and why has there been only 1 science books included in the New York Times best books of the year/100 notable books since 2004? Could this again reflect the ignorance or lack of appreciation of science (something that I've always accepted to be true)? Are the panel of editors who select these books to be on the list science-illiterate? Or have there been not worthy science books in the last 4 years?

Frankly, I am not surprised by such omission. I mean, when was the last time Oprah has picked a book, or highlighted a book on her show with actual science content? Instead, she promoted "The Secret", which bastardized quantum mechanics as its "scientific justification" for all the mumbo-jumbo it is proposing.

Zz.

No comments:
http://physicsandphysicists.blogspot.com/2008/01/in-praise-of-science-books.html
physicsandphysicists.blogspot.com
crawl=CC-MAIN-2017-13
142718
application/http; msgtype=response
sha1:HBQ5NR2D37OG2NVFYYRYSIMJ2VIWVNRT
<urn:uuid:93058e74-6302-427e-bd73-5e110e6d8d89>
2017-03-28T11:55:46Z
172.217.7.193
sha1:6HPRPYZDBV24J7KSPJR4KW5KZG7JBBFU
<urn:uuid:9d34ce8e-a52e-46b3-9cf4-3d830f69b39f>
http://physicsandphysicists.blogspot.com/2008/01/in-praise-of-science-books.html
response
<urn:uuid:db82af0a-45ca-4e73-ad9d-68fbdd338d3a>
robots: classic
hostname: ip-10-233-31-227.ec2.internal
software: Nutch 1.6 (CC)/CC WarcExport 1.0
isPartOf: CC-MAIN-2017-13
operator: CommonCrawl Admin
description: Wide crawl of the web for March 2017
publisher: CommonCrawl
format: WARC File Format 1.0
conformsTo: http://bibnum.bnf.fr/WARC/WARC_ISO_28500_version1_latestdraft.pdf