Ardrey is a fine, ethical scientist who made no effort to be ...
935349
I didn't think that Ardrey (or anyone else for that matter) could surpass the excellence of The Territorial Imperative as the standard reference on human socio-political organisation, but I'm starting to think The Social Contract might just achieve that. I'm an unabashed Ardrey fan, so perhaps it's not surprising. Ardrey is a fine, ethical scientist who made no effort to be politically correct. I found this book riveting from the first page to the last, and like Territorial Imperative did some years ago, it formed a watershed in my understanding of the puzzling penchant of my species for warfare in all its many forms. I wish I could give it ten stars.
4975110
Santiago Ramon y Cajal's achievement, the neuronal doctrine -undoubtedly the foundation of all relevant knowledge about the nervous systems, including the human brain-, was not the product of teamwork, technology or  fashion. It was the achievement of his educated insight and uncomparable  dedication. Scholars in the field of psychology teach us that advice can be  interpreted as an attempt to justify the thoughts and actions of its  originator. It seems inevitable that this work should reflect Cajal's  disillusions with the institutionalization of mediocrity and with the  arbitrariness of academic hierarchy. Surely, today, readers in numerous  parts of the world will find these commonplace. Yet, Cajal's voice sounds  as loud and clear as ever as a guiding light in the obscure path of human  accomplishment. It will prevent any cultured reason from originating the  kind of monsters that arise from its dreams. The book will -quoting Lucian-  "...ornament your soul with what concerns you most: temperance,  justice, piety, kindliness, reasonableness, understanding, steadfastness,  love of all that is beautiful, ardour towards all that is sublime; for  these are the truly flawless jewels of the soul... for though you yourself  depart from life, you will never cease associating with men of education  and conversing with men of eminence".
I have returned to these  pages constantly since I was in medical school.
Recommended to lay  people or scientists alike of an inquisitive nature who disregard  authority, distrust officiality, wish to create, and consider themselves  perpetual students of men and nature. A vey useful resource, too, when  things go wrong in the lab.
2280241
The Bottom Line --
This story is engaging from the first page. It is a moral dilemma soul-searcher in a sci-fi setting. The lead character, a lifelong evolutionist and atheist, struggles with evidence pointing to the existence of a creator-though not exactly the Judeo-Christian God. Dusted throughout with scientific language and examples, the book provides a good review of much of what is controversial in evolution. Though most such topics are covered too cursorily to be used as a learning text, some are explained very well in understandable layman's terms.
The Story --
An 8-legged twin-mouthed alien lands near the Royal Ontario Museum in Toronto and says, in perfect English, "I would like to see a paleontologist." (He learned English by monitoring TV broadcasts.) The alien is Hollus, a paleontologist (fossil scientist) from the star Beta Hydri, visiting Earth on a research mission. He is introduced to Dr Thomas Jericho, head of Vertebrate Paleontology, who, we learn later, has less than a year to live-cancer. Hollus asks for an information exchange. Since gathering fossils is very labor-intensive and time-consuming, Hollus' small crew can't do it themselves. So they exchange information with scholars on the planets they visit.
Hollus is alarmed that earth's scientists consider God outside the scope of science-his race considers it the job of science to study God's behavior and methods. To Hollus, earth's scientists are ignoring clear evidence for the existence of a creator. The bulk of the story revolves around this conflict, and around Dr Jericho's battle with cancer.
The Moral --
(Dr) Jericho is under siege by God's forces (the aliens) and the walls are in danger of tumbling down. The major moral dilemma pits Jericho's commitment to, not just evolution, but also atheism, against evidence for a creator. Some evidence is supplied by the aliens, and therefore fictional. But other evidence is contemporary and actual. The anthropic cosmological principle is discussed nicely: that many properties of nature are finely-tuned to support life; if they were slightly different, life could not exist. Jericho discusses the prejudices of evolutionary scientists, which color their interpretation of that evidence; also the legitimate foundations of that prejudice.
Although Sawyer's book puts a positive spin on the concept of God's existence, it puts no such spin on Christianity (or any other religion). The God we see here is not the all-powerful, all-knowing God of monotheism; instead, he is very smart but limited and imperfect. He isn't the loving, involved God of Christianity; he is an engineer working a project, not caring about the people involved. Christian people are portrayed two ways, both rather negatively. We see Jericho's wife Susan, who is loving, sensitive, and sensible-but also powerless and ineffective. And we see a pair of religious fanatics, who are irrational and violent in the extreme-the ultimate bad role models.
4663655
At the very out set Cremo and Thompson do not come on as Creationists or Intelligent Designers in their views. They make it clear that with what evidence they have they will use the evolutionists dating theories to apply them.  While some of the information that they bring forth verge on the edge, the real question they are making is simple.  That is, if scientists put such emphases on investigation, then why not openly investigate these?  It is not so much the evidence that they bring forward, it the hypocrisy that is revealed in the science community.  After all, it is this community that has seemed to impress us with the idea of the so called scientific method as the proper tool of proof.  Anything less is worthless.  Cremo and Thompson contrasts this high and holier idea with discoveries that many of these people time and time again even refuse to consider all the objections to the data.  And most of the answers are simply based on the idea that their theory of origins say certain things should not be happening at certain times.  And thats that!  For example the Klerpsdorf spheres found in South Africa in a strata known to be at least 2 billion years old.  While there are theories of natural processes that are given to account for them, the problem is those groves that appear on all of them.  Those groves clearly are not made by a natural process.  They are far to perfect.  And what about the foot prints found in rock layers which no human tracks should be in?  These are also poohed as being done by natural processes.  Then these scientists lay out their reasoning for their opinion based on natural processes that surround the prints.  Yet, they ignore the same reasoning if foot prints they find seems to prove their beloved theory.  All that is demand is that all receive a fair hearing and research.  As a matter of fact it is beginning to be rather strange that anything that seems to question evolution is simply rejected out of hand.  The chorus of many fine and intelligent people who are equally educated as the evolutionist is growing and so is their rejection of Darwin.  And still we see no attempt on the side of evolutionists to consider any objection to their theory.  So this book simply adds to those of us who want a real scientific process to occur at all levels and for all discoveries - no matter where they are found.  Is this not reasonable to ask such intelligent people to do?  Study, and investigate, and so on and let the evidences lead us as it may rather then our preconceived ideas.  What hurts this request is this UFO nonsense.  But still, even then, let us dare to be the real thing and research all things.  Let debate go forth and use and apply the same standard of investigation on all things.  That is all that  Cremo and Thompson are asking in this particular work.  While they have some strange religious views, that is fine too.  Bring it on, and lets honestly test all things without our preconceived convictions.

I recommend this book because of the amount of odd and interesting information that they researched.  While not being "scientists" both men are highly educated and know well what they are writing about.  It is written on a high lay level of reading.  It gives good insight on how the internal science operates.  They raise the same questions about the main stream evolutionary science as do the Creationists and ID people and a growing host of others.  That is, the evolution scientists own all the research journals and make no attempt to include anything that seriously calls into question the doctrine of evolution.  If anything, they suppress it and refuse to test it.
947125
This is the complete review as it appears (http://ianwoodnovellum.blogspot.com/2015/04/darwin-graphic-biography-by-eugene-byrne.html) at my blog dedicated to reading, writing (no 'rithmatic!), movies, & TV.

As a young man, Darwin was rather rudderless. He was pointed in the direction of family tradition (for men) which was medicine, but he couldn't stand the sight of blood and had to leave the OR during one surgery he was supposed to be witnessing. Of course, medicine was far more of an experimental  if not just plain mental  endeavor back in his day than it is now, and far more bloody and painful (there was no anesthesia). Perhaps Darwin was wise in deciding that he would much rather spend his time taking nature rambles and looking at beetles, plants, and life in tidal pools.

His father determined that he should become a clergyman in default of a medical career, and though he was religious, Darwin wasn't interested in that, either. He did manage, with some help, to complete his schooling, but before he had a chance to lose his way in the church, he had the opportunity to take a sea voyage on a ship called The Beagle. The idea was to finish mapping South Americas coast line and estuaries for trade and naval use.

The voyage was supposed to last two years, but Darwin was gone for five, and when he returned, he was quite a celebrity in scientific circles, having documented geology and life, both plant an animal, extensively, and sent back hundreds and hundreds of specimens, some of them live, along with letters and reports. One of these live specimens was a giant tortoise from the Galapagos, which ended up in Australia and died only in 2006.

The idea of organisms changing over time is inescapable to anyone with eyes and a decent amount of smarts. Its evident even in living species, and its blatantly evident from the fossil record, but because of the power of the church, it was very much a taboo subject. Nonetheless, the evidence forced it into the light, and Darwin wasn't the first person ever to think about this. He was the first to marshal so great a wealth of evidence, supported by a working, testable explanation, that the subject could no longer be ignored by the populace, dismissed by scientists, or repressed by religious authorities.

This book describes his life leading up to the Beagle voyage, the voyage itself, and the years of hesitation and agonizing over the theory before he finally published his land-mark work late in 1859. Darwins On the Origin of Species was a best-seller, and was read not only by scientists and the wealthy, but by ordinary people for whom it was an expensive purchase. When he learned that everyday people were reading it, Darwin even produced a mass market version  using smaller print so it cost less to produce and buy.

This graphic novel explains lucidly and accurately what the theory was all about, and details some of the extensive evidence that supports it. It also cuts the legs out from under a lot of the lies which young-Earth creationists have been forced to create in their attempts at character-assassination of Darwin over the years, as they realized their attempts at science have failed dismally and repeatedly. I thoroughly recommend this book.
2863461
There are very few scientists in history who can truly be called 'giants'. Two times Nobel Prize winner Linus Pauling was undoubtedly one of them, and also a great humanitarian. In this biography, Thomas Hager brings a fine perspective to the life of this remarkable man.
Hager puts every part of Pauling's life and science in the spotlight; growing up in Oregon among difficult times without a father, attending college and university through sheer grit and determination, learning the new sciences of x-ray crystallography and quantum mechanics, and finally applying this knowledge to an amazing array of fields in chemistry, physics, biology and medicine, in the process becoming one of the greatest scientists of the century.

Pauling's life can really be divided into two parts, both of which Hager discusses in detail. In the first part, he became the foremost chemist in the world and made contributions to an almost unbelievable variety of topics; the chemical bond and quantum chemistry, inorganic and organic chemistry, biochemistry and molecular biology, and medical research. In at least two of these, quantum chemistry and molecular biology, he became their founding father in the true sense of the term.
In the second part of his life, Pauling became a great humanitarian, relentlessly protesting against nuclear testing in the face of great troubles brought about by McCarthysm and the Cold War. After World War 2, Pauling's life was a constant struggle as he waged war against nuclear weapons, was accused of having  Communist sympathies and denied a passport for travelling to England by the State Department (thus possibly missing out on winning the race to discover the DNA structure), and had to leave his beloved Caltech of many years because of tensions between himself and the administration. When he received the Nobel Peace prize, a prominent newspaper called it 'a weird insult from Sweden'.
In spite of all this, Pauling still found time to make the great discovery of protein structure, and make decisive contributions to molecular biology and medicine. He was the first person to describe a genetically inherited disease, sickle cell anemia, in molecular terms. This is one of the harbingers of the modern age of drug discovery and gene-therapy. Hager portrays both Pauling's scientific as well as political crusades in an excellent way. He also manages to put the man in context, and discusses the general changing political and scientific scenario of Pauling's times. This includes the beginning of 'big science', the permanent moulding of science and politics, and the coming of age of American academia and industry.

In later years, Pauling was even more bitterly criticized for his espousal of unorthodox ideas in nutrition and medicine (especially his insistence about the benefits of unusually large doses of Vitamin C as a puported cure for almost everything, from the common cold to cancer). However, the last words on his medical theories has not yet been said and research continues.
From very early on in all of Pauling's endeavors, he was constantly supported by an extraordinary woman; his wife, Ava Helen, and Hager very rightly gives due and important attention to her in this book; many times, the essential strong and silent women behind the men are forgotten and fortunately Hager does not do this.

There are many biographies of Pauling ( the ones by Serafini, Goertzel and Mead being the main ones). In its scope and comprehensivenes, Hager's is probably the best. All in all, a great read about a truly important scientist-citizen of the last century
922972
Wrapped in a cloak of poetic license, Michael Creighton violates his own principle counseling against the politicization of science.  As ever, Creighton exhibits his enormous capacity to weave plausible scientific theory into a thrilling tale of predictive exploitation.  The immediate target of his criticism is the environmental lobby and its dire predictions of global warming, a claim Creighton urges us to defer until science overtakes rank speculation.  Creighton, however, exceeds this cautionary note by depicting environmental extremists to be high tech versions of their anti-abortion cousins who occasionally engage in mayhem and murder in emphasizing their point of view.

He's quickly mired in an overly simplistic exaggeration in characterizing environmentalists as either simple minded believers or self serving zealots devoted, first, to creating and then exploiting fears of environmental disasters.  The imminent threat of global warming is the foundation on which Creighton's environmentalists seek to raise money for the ostensible benefit of all mankind.  Unfortunately, the data defining global disaster is highly suspect, ambiguous and, therefore, subject to interpretive distortion.

For me, the tale loses its initial claim of plausibility when Creighton describes the impossible antics of a junior level associate in a large law firm who serves as its primary contact with an important, wealthy client while casually disregarding basic protocols of partner supervision.  Creighton, who evidently dislikes attorneys, depicts this young naf as the uncritical pawn of impulsive, highly irresponsible environmental extremists.  Ignoring bright line ethical constraints and exposing his own superiors to certain disbarment, at least in a plausible world, the associate collaborates with trial attorneys who manufacture evidence in order to launch  lawsuits bereft of prima facie substance.  In legal jargon, they eviscerate the concept of "colorable grounds" for making legal claims and blatantly violate provisions in the U.S. Code which cannot withstand political scrutiny, much less the legal scrutiny of judicial oversight.

Creighton completely ignores the far more immediate and deleterious impact of air pollution and industrial waste on human health, much less the wanton destruction of ecological balance and species of both plant and animal life we know to be essential to a self-sustaining environment.  Instead he depicts unseen industrial leaders as sober realists whose free market efforts, with the assistance of selfless federal agents and a few enlightened PhDs who serve as highly trained combatants, sustain the human fabric of our society and economy.

Simply stated, if you can suspend any critical thought whatsoever, this might prove to be an enjoyable escapist undertaking.
2184740
A portrait of an usual and successful scientist. The description of sterile compounding was an unexpected bonus
2641824
By definition ethics are the moral principles that govern a persons or a groups behavior. As a student of the human race, I am always interested in the principles that guide us, which is what drew me to the book by Richard Todd Devens entitled RATIONAL POLEMICS: TACKLING THE ETHICAL DILEMMAS OF LIFE.

Devens grapples with such issues as religion, vigilantism, forgiveness, the death penalty, and other, important and provocative issues from his perspective: that of a musician, martial artist, and avowed Athiest, who has been greatly influenced by the writings of Ayn Rand. He quotes Rand liberally while attempting to put his experience through her analyses of Objective Morality.

It is not up to THIS reader to decide whether Devens  or Rand  are correct or to provide counter-arguments. RATIONAL POLEMICS should be taken as one mans inner journey to understand some of the BIG questions based on those moral principles to which he relates, and thats a courage that we all should muster.

A review copy of this book was provided free of charge.
98696
As one who teaches evolution, I find Mr. Roberts comments disturbing. If one is as uninformed on a subject as he obviously is about the nature of evolution and its place in science, then it is far better to simply not say  anything at all. Darwinian evolution has won in the sense that it is the  dominant scientific theory of the origin of species; it is strongly  supported by empirical as well as observational evidence. Creationism on  the other hand, has failed miserably in the court of science.  While  Stephen Gould is an excellent writer and has hooked a lot of the general  public on his pet theory, punctuated equilibrium, his views are far less  accepted in the world of science (see e.g. Mystery of mysteries by M.  Ruse).  Given the rarity of the fossilization process, it is amazing that  we have as many as we do. Despite protestations to the contrary,  transitional fossils do exist! Birds, whales, mammals, and humans all show  strong trends from ancestoral to modern forms based on their fossil  records. The fossil record is otherwise not so spotty that we can't make  strong inference regarding all of life. Think of reading a mystery novel by  skipping 10 pages at a time; while you don't grasp all of the details, a  clever person can figure out the plot. the same goes for reading the fossil  record. Darwin was being a good scientist when he said one misplaced fossil  would be a problem for his theory. It is a basic tenet of science that all  results are tentative. As of yet, however, there are no misplaced fossils  and the Darwinian view of life is in solid ground. A book that tries to do  a balancing act between evolution and creationism is like one that would  balance the arguments for and against a flat earth. It could be done, but  to the logical and informed mind is an insult.
502489
Friedrich von Hayek has been one of the most ardent exponents of the dreamy hopes of progress and happiness that supposedly, would be brought by the Industrial Revolution.

When the triumph of the polytechnic spirit as he calls it, covers and comprises the whole of human experiences, in such extent to deny any other value it becomes a new sect and really, all of who maintain this belief become heretics due its own fanaticism. He wants to prevent us about the enormous risk of reducing the science to "scientism."

The rereading of this text is especially helpful in these times in which we are immersed in what we might call an ethical deficit of huge proportions that has underpinned the pragmatism to unexpected places. So the fact to expect the science and technology  be by themselves the universal antidote, product of a superficial diagnosis or mistaking cause and effect, sooner or later a double cutting doge weapon.

Two brief examples may witness it: the use of DDT resolved a serious problem but also generated another one. And here we have: how to deal and even conciliate a dynamical vitality in our way of life without damage of our environment; because the imminent crisis of "the greenhouse effect" simply cannot wait any longer and obviously will demand and even affect a wide spectrum of the productive forces, no matter how effective negotiator you be at the moment to conciliate both interests in conflict.
4063590
An unassuming man of tremendous talent and also a brilliant academic background matched against his father, one of America's leading scientists years ago, comes to light in this edition of his focus upon what it has been like to feel the quiet but also evidentiary  direction of the forces of good, of love, of inspiration, of pure knowledge, and a guidance of such proportions as to be the means to verify that this is a man, who has learned as Moses said, "Look to God and live!"
Even with the foibles of his youth, the sometimes careless decisions he made, yet in the midst of his focus upon a Christ-centered life, Henry Eyring stands as one of the great icons of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. However, the book is not just for the saints but also anyone, who is earnestly striving to find purpose to his/her life, and who in her/his own way would like to have some guidelines of what it takes to achieve when the nature of things seems to be against that achievement.
3846216
Andrew Wakefield MD is one of the most impressive and believable human beings I have ever seen speak.  His research is dead on and efforts to discredit him have not been successful to those who have done any searching for the real truth. He is brilliant! He has more courage than anyone I have ever known. I hope other truth seekers will not be put off by the paid trolls who leave negative reviews on this work and others that reveal the evils committed by the CDC FDA American Academy of Pediatrics, NIH and big corporation corruption.
3709243
This is a must-read book for people like me, non-scientists who might hope there is something more to life than the material world but are baffled (if not downright disheartened) by the atheistic assertions espoused by people like Richard Dawkins.  The problem with issues like the existence of the soul beyond the chemical functions of the brain, or of mankind having a purpose on earth, is that while these are fascinating topics to discuss, you can never really get anywhere as they inevitably end up being purely philosophical.  No matter how eloquently one might speak on man's higher consciousness, the proofs of Aquinas blah blah blah, there will always be a Richard Dawkins in the room sniggering at you and saying "Prove it".  This book really does change that.  In easy, clear, but evidential science, Bruce Lipton takes you with contagious enthusiasm through his own discoveries as a PhD researching in cell biology -- which unexpectedly for him, resulted in his discovery of the energy field holding us all in being.  We don't exist; we are 'existed'.  Furthermore, Lipton proposes that the survival-of-the-fittest model of evolution is, on evidence, flawed; that life evolved because of cooperation between cells, not as a battle for dominance, and that these same principles of cooperation between cells and communities of cells are vital for the health of each individual body.

This is a book I plan to read again, because it has given me enormous confidence to know that there is more and more evidence in science that reveals what I always hoped was not just a silly emotional instinct - that there is a God, even if we don't quite know what that means, and that we are all part of a universal spirit.  In fact, after reading this book, the rantings of the scientific materialists seem silly and old-fashioned.  They won't be able to dishearten me any more.
3273463
I am deeply impressed by C.B. Sullenberger, not as a an aeronautic hero, but as a philosopher. I am a phlosopher. I believe prople who think about life and its meaning should do what they have come to believe in. Yes, walk the talk. Sully Sullenberger does just that. when he was tested in his crash in the Hudson River, he was steady and resoled just as he had been n the 15,000 miles on his AirBus plan. That is he did his job of landing the plane,managing the attendants to manage over two hundred people to saftey.

Then when the media mob painted him as a hero, he modestly declined the aura. when he returned to Danville, California where lives. he made it clear, he is not a hero. He is a man that adopts the highest values of his job and he does it.

Sullenberger has integrity of the kind one can trust. To have such a philosopohy of self and the world would create a better world..

Vernon Dolphin
4658546
It's strange how many "the world is going to end" books cross my desk. Our Final Hour: A Scientist's Warning: How Terror, Error, and Environmental Disaster Threaten Humankind's Future In This Century--On Earth and Beyond is the latest offering is by Sir Martin Rees, England's Astronomy Royal, and delves into the possiblility that the fate of humanity, the Earth, and maybe even the entire universe is in the hands of well-intentioned (or malicious) scientists as they push the boundaries of nature.
Scientists will destroy the world! We've all heard that before, but found it kind of a strange statement coming from one of the more prominent scientists in the world. In "Our Final Hour", however, Rees makes some well-reasoned arguments about the dangers of scientific exploration. Not that we shouldn't explore nature, just that we should be mindful of the risks and take extra precautions.
The book is a quick read, only 228 pages, and takes us through the range of doomsday scenarios that scientists can unleash: environmental disasters that warm/cool the Earth and make it unlivable; bioterrorism that could unleash a plague of germs on the populace; and exotic physics experiments that could convert all matter in the universe into something... unpleasant.
Rees is calm and reasoned in his arguments; at no point does he stray into "science is bad" rants. Instead, he adopts the tone of a scientific professional, concerned about the ethical implications of scientific discovery. But he doesn't argue that science should be slowed down, in fact, Rees believes that it's pretty much impossible to stop scientific development. For every country that has a ban on genetic research, there will be one happy to support it. And technology will allow the tools to create viruses and other nastiness by a much larger group of people - some with nasty intentions.
I guess that's where the book fell down a bit for me. It offers up lots challenges the world could face from science, but it's short on solutions that could help guide policy. I got the impression that Rees feels largely pessimistic that anything can really be done to slow progress, and the inevitable disasters science could cause. It's unrealistic to tell scientists what they can and can't work on; even more difficult to enforce ethical guidelines; and probably impossible to stop technology from falling into the wrong hands. The only hope Rees sees is in human spaceflight - essentially escaping the problem and heading to the stars. That's all well and good, but the Earth is where I keep all my stuff. There's got to be more than that. I was hoping for a much longer book that offered up some deeper policy suggestions, but I suspect the implications are just too far reaching to make realistic suggestions.
Still, it's an interesting read.
3650859
Isaac Asimov once defended his no-frills literary style against elitist criticism by asserting that what he brought to the table was a gift for clarity (and indeed, he expressed complex ideas with laser-sharp and easy to follow precision).

Mr. Goddard aspires to that kind of clarity here, but falls far short with technical descriptions involving math, computer projections and vectors that can pull up short even one who has a knack for following all that stuff. What IS clear is his attempt to create the literary equivalent of a "bottle" story -- locale limited to the crime scene and the lab, few other meaningful settings, and those, I think, only at the very end -- and show Our Heroes in a scientific Race Against the Clock.

The drawback is twofold: First, there's not all that much at stake. There's a professional assassin unable to get away from a mountaintop locale, and if Our Guys don't solve the mystery of who's responsible for what in a "hail of bullets" crime scene at a nearby stakeout site, he'll get away. Not get away to do something bad like kill an innocent or deliver a bio-hazard into "the wrong hands," just get away. Second: There's very little human drama, and it's the balance of shattered lives against the technical road to justice that has always been the trick to a CSI mystery -- to say nothing of those cameo, yet cumulative glimpses into the humanity of the CSIs themselves.

Goddard does seem to have a handle on the regular characters in terms of attitude and tone ... but for the most part they lack depth outside of their scientific curiosity; and this is made manifest in the long technical and expository speeches he gives them to rattle off -- often peppered with internal sidebars, like this one, set off by dashes -- that keep ironically violating the verisimilitude he's trying so hard to maintain; because for all his veteran CSI knowhow (Goddard was one in real life), real people, even real science people, simply don't talk that way. Even allowing for the inevitable neatening process of art, that gives fictional characters the ability to be unusually articulate and concise, Mr. Goddard way overindulges the literary license.

It's not a horrible book, and if you like the CSI universe enough, perhaps not even a dull one ... but it makes you miss the (seeming) ease with which Max Allan Collins managed to walk the tightrope with all his previous CSI novels ... and makes you appreciate his openness in acknowledging Matthew V. Clemens as his researcher and co-plotter. I can't imagine a more difficult TV series to wrangle into satisfying tie-in novels, because the template is SO restrictive ... and reading Ken Goddard's noble but labored misfire puts into perspective just how artful the Collins books are, and how deceptive their easy flow.