Its delivery is factual but poor, and it vastly overstates the role or importance ...
350475
This video almost has the feel of a recruiting aid for Naval Recruiters to give to prospective recruits, except its focus is too narrow. Its delivery is factual but poor, and it vastly overstates the role or importance of the aircraft carrier in many cases or events with very lopsided delivery of information. This presentation is almost propagandist in nature. I'm glad I didn't spend money on this, but sorry I lost 40 plus minutes of valuable time.
3779993
The video contains many great facts about the invention of the television, but the delivery of these facts are horrible.  The description does not tell you that the video was created in 1996 and has the pacing of an old documentary.  I'm sure a newer video about the television would be better, but this video is a sleeper.  I could never use it in my classes at school.
4308048
Praised as one of Updike's best books, The Centaur is in reality little more than a confusing and disappointing literary ego trip.  Its premise is original and promising, but the novel simply does not live up to its potential.  Updike is trying here to accomplish too much, and as a result he accomplishes very little.  The narrative is disjointed, the characters' voices are remarkably inconsistent, and the plot drags.  And the book's most fatal flaw is that it fails to communicate precisely what its message is.  The reader is left with the big unanswered question of why this book is deserving of our attention.  One senses that there is some deeper meaning, some profound truth trying to reveal itself.  But one also wonders if maybe it's all just Updike putting a glossy wax on an otherwise unimpressive surface.
590110
This made-for-TV(CBS) film is a textbook example of the media massaging the message. The Jonestown "event" happened in late November 1978, this movie was on TV by 1980--within little more than a year CBS is further reinforcing and shaping the public's image and the very mythology of Jonestown. Although it is a second-rate production with poor acting and dialogue (I image the result of haste) the movie's importance lies in what it does not tell you...see&nbsp;<a data-hook="product-link-linked" class="a-link-normal" href="/Was-Jonestown-a-CIA-Medical-Experiment-A-Review-of-the-Evidence-Studies-in-American-Religion-Vol-35/dp/0889460132/ref=cm_cr_arp_d_rvw_txt?ie=UTF8">Was Jonestown a CIA Medical Experiment?: A Review of the Evidence (Studies in American Religion, Vol 35)</a>...among others.

Watch this film after having consulted other sources and understand how we are manipulated.
3508034
While this information COULD be legitimate, the biased, ranting, judgemental condemnation significantly detracts from the obvious intent of the message.
2974306
Carl Trueman argues a work of history should not seek to be neutral, but it should seek to be objective in nature. The historian should use such procedures and methods so that other historians can comprehend how came to his conclusions about what happened. The author uses the terms verifiability and accountability of how the historian came to his conclusions. This work is an attempt to equip the reader with the tools to identify a bad work of history and/or a fallacies argument made in an otherwise good work of history.  All historians need to select material, arrange it, and interpret the material. The historian operates under certain principles and rules so the history presented is an honest effort to bring "re-presentation of the past" that is concluded based on vigorous research. The author calls it a representation of the past because all works of history is an interpretation of what happened in the past and a presentation of the author's interpretation of that past.

I sought out to read this because of an item in March 2012 Tabletalk magazine published through Ligonier ministries. Trueman argued in his short article that Christianity needs Christians who need to know good history. The author states that he enjoys many good histories that are coming out today. First in the article he demonstrated bad theological arguments based on inaccurate history based nonobjective means of gathering information then presenting a misleading conclusions based on so-call facts. This book is an attempt to equip the reader to understand when a work is bad history. The author Trueman does believe a presentation of bad history can be engaging and entertaining. In this book the author discusses how a historian may seem to be objective in his research of collecting evidence and the use coherent logic in making an engaging presentation of the past. Yet in reality the writer uses faulty logic and not allowing contradictory evidence interfere in writing a history based on the bad historians hypothesis.

This work starts out with an argument against postmodern thought in creation of history and interpreting information. Although a historian may bring understanding of what happened in the past, his work is a presentation of the past. The fact, no one can understand totally what is happening today or happened yesterday, does not mean a narrative of the past is not a more accurate portrayal of what happened then another history. Not all interpretations of the past are equally valid. There are differences of opinion about what happened based on honest efforts of a good historian, but there are also silly interpretations of the past based on notion, bad information, or fallacies of logic. Not all histories are equally valid. The author uses those deny the Holocaust as example.

I found the book an interesting read. I am not sure how much better I am equipped to identify bad history after reading the work.
4583316
Mr. Grodi's show on EWTN is probably the only truly smart show on the network. And this book seems to memorialize many of the sorts of conversations he has on that program The Journey Home. I actually have learned some interesting details of denominational beliefs hearing his various guests discuss their pathway to becoming Roman Catholics. Therefore it almost does not matter that it is all delivered with sleep-inducing, and suspiciously submerged and docile rhetoric. hardly the characteristic of the true convert type, at any rate, but that is another matter.  But a recent panel discussion on the show involving converts from various denominations unfortunately confirms that Grodi's intelligence is not commensurate with his integrity. One of his guests, named Rich Lane, a convert from Lutheranism, made the assertion that he thought, from his present vantage point, that Lutherans treat the Bible as if Martin Luther himself had written it. This produced riotous laughter and applause from the assembled crowd. Professional biblical gadfly Scott Hahn was there on the panel as well, and neither he nor Grodi said a word against this notion. Well, it is just a terrible assertion that a great religious figure like Luther believed himself to be the author of the Christian Scriptures. It is just the most perverse exaggeration, even delusion, that history can be read thusly  in any way whatsoever, to even remotely coddle such a suggestion either. There may indeed have been a skein of very odd humor going on here. But in a way, looking at it from a humorous perspective makes the silence of the supposedly knowledgeable people on the panel even worse. Most clearly , it show what a fringe operation EWTN is, not even keeping to general societal respect for the basic beliefs of religious actors in that society, effectively turning their religiosity into idolatry and vanity. .  Further, it shows that they are deeply engaged in propaganda here, of a very anachronistic sort. If Luther's own hyperbolic rhetoric in his own day is to be matched today 550 years later by  jokes in supposedly serious environments, then the whole notion of the respect premising religious liberty in our time is besmirched. Marcus Grodi needs to pray on his real position before a loving God, who loves all who believe. And, mysteriously,  even those who don't.
2143518
This is a very poorly-orchestrated documentary. I would imagine that most people watch documentaries for the same reason I do - to be informed - and this documentary does precious little of that.

The ideological bias and economic ignorance of the creators of this documentary are glaring from the start and take such a domineering role in the film as it progresses that I was stunned to have something that could have been genuinely informative and have led to a coalition-building message that might have some appeal outside the flock (eminent domain abuse under the Kelo v. City of New London decision) sidelined in favor of dogmatic preaching to the indoctrinated.

The eminent domain issue was addressed so sparingly and deferred until so far into the film that it appears almost deliberately calculated to obfuscate the extent to which the crusade that the filmmakers clearly sought to call is one demanded by the abuse of eminent domain as opposed to simple self-interested frustration of those whose use of property they do not own is demonstrably less valuable than those that the actual owners of the property wish to transition to. Whatever the facts are, this suggests to any viewer who is not already inclined to buy the story that the filmmakers wish to sell (and the political agenda along with it) that the substance behind the story is lacking.

One can readily come to one of two possible conclusions: (1) that a flimsy and purely dogmatic agenda has been coated in the veneer of a respectable argument (the eminent domain issue) for the sake of persuading the less attentive of the uninitiated to support the message or (2) that the filmmakers, in their ineptitude at their craft and/or eagerness to push their agenda did their own argument a disservice in failing so spectacularly to address the distinction and provide any concrete facts for those viewers not already inclined to lap up whatever is placed before them.

If you are already convinced of the intrinsic evil of profit and putting scarce resources to efficient use, this vapid documentary will only tell you what you already no and add nothing to your knowledge base, leaving you no more ready to address the subject matter than before you watched it.

If you are skeptical of the original sin of efficient use of scarce resources, you will find nothing informative in this farce of a documentary and only tired ideological preaching. There are much better uses of your time.
597849
I am writing from the perspective of a scholar whose field covers several of the issues Mr. Brown touches on in his novel. I wish to say first that where my field intersects with the "information" presented as an integral part of the novel, there is not a single "fact" presented by Mr. Brown that is to my knowledge verifiably true; many of these "facts" are verifiably false. In particular, Mr. Brown's presentation of what he calls the "sacred feminine" or the "goddess" is extraordinarily misleading; his connection of this concept to Mary Magdalene is, from the perspectives of history and scholarly comparative religion, bizarre. I say this book is irresponsible most of all because, as many of the reviews here (including the Amazon.com review!) show, most readers of this novel will believe Mr. Brown when he writes that his book is as accurate as he can make it. I would perhaps not be so unhappy had Mr. Brown not made what I consider his most irresponsible decision, to put the vast majority of these views in the mouth and mind of a character who is a world-renowned "Professor of Symbology," a field the vast majority of readers are unlikely to know does not exist. By using this character as he does, Mr. Brown simultaneously adds a false veneer of academic authority (something he demonstrates himself to be very concerned about, since his character constantly cites authorities who, he does not bother to mention, are rejected by real scholars) and insults the real scholars who devote their lives to helping people like Mr. Brown's readers learn the sometimes unexciting *truth* about these things.
4226531
The story of Lt. Gen. Sir George Prevost's 1814 Lake Champlain offensive, and how it was thwarted by Commodore Thomas Macdonough's squadron in an improbable naval battle fought within the confines of Plattsburgh Bay, is certainly worth telling.  Unfortunately, Col. Fitz-Enz tells it rather poorly here.  He has presented some interesting, new information which he obtained from Sir George's descendants - including the so-called "secret orders" for the campaign - but his book is neither particularly well organized nor particularly well written. It contains many factual and technical errors, as well as not a few gramatical and even spelling errors that should have been caught by even a cursory job of editing.

  The principal value of the book is to rescue an important chapter of American history from ill-deserved obscurity for readers who otherwise might never have heard of it.  Perhaps it will inspire more careful historians and more capable writers to more competently address the same topic.
1252214
Poorly thought out political propaganda disguised as a badly written story.
2207834
Any student of history knows that international terrorism has ancient roots but the real revelation is that the problem is not simply the Jihadists. True, they have one goal and that is the utter destruction of Israel and the Jewish people. However, that bloody agenda is underwritten and supported by much of Western civilization. And the template for the "modern" concepts of the West come from the Roman Empire whose foundation is linked to Biblical Esau, brother of Jacob (Israel).

Like Esau, the West shares a cultural, ethical and familial tie with the Jewish People. Yet, that ancient connection has become dangerously strained by the selfish need to dominate the Jews and to claim their rightful inheritance (one that includes more than just real estate). Professor Narrett demonstrates how Western civilization's boast--that it embodies the highest ideas of Greco-Roman thought--is a hollow boast. As an ideology it will eventually fail because it is man-made.

The book should be required reading for our leadership who seem to have utterly missed a vital historical lessson from the Roman Empire. They realized, after it was too late, that the Jews were entrusted with a set of vibrant, life-sustaining laws (the Torah) that provide a genuine path to peace.

If you want to understand the conundrum of the so-called peace process and its equally worthless 'Roadmap' you need to read  Eugene Narrett's lucid revelation, Israel & the Endtimes. His book is more than an urgent call for sanity, it also reveals the folly of the New Middle East.

I recommend it highly.
3560303
I honestly think that the subject matter of this book would have been easier to express as a plain-old non-fiction book or a novelization of the documentary material.  The author, however, had become fixated on the idea of a graphic novel (oxymoron though that expression might be) and teamed up with an artist who appears to be of the "blurred and hard to make out" school.  As a result, the information the author is attempting to get across, important though it is, becomes lost in facile word balloons and textual "voice over" narrations.  And, more often than not, the renderings of characters are indefinite, leaving the reader (viewer?) in doubt of who is being depicted, thus thoroughly muddling an unfortunately overly-simplified narrative.

Please pull out the word processor, sit down, and do it right.
532315
This movie addresses some important teen issues, but it is more of an exaggeration than the real truth.  If you were to take EVERY aspect of sexuality, magnify it, and then throw all problems into one cauldron, then that would be the scenario with this presentation.  It is true that some girls are promiscuous, but the action in this story is more of a caricature than the truth.
2616049
I was really looking forward to reading this book. When I got it, I found it very disappointing. There are two problems that I have with this book. The first is the style that it is written in, the second is the coverage and structure.

I found the style too anecdotal. I would have preferred something more academic. I felt as if I was wading through a lot of gumpf, before I got to any facts. The second issue here is that it focuses on narrow examples, rather than giving you an overview. I don't want to read a great detail about Gabon before I see Africa addressed as a continent for example. I find the style similar to CNN stlye reportage; high on emotive topics and narrow perspective, low on facts. It reads as if the author has an agenda and points to examples to prove his case. I would prefer a presentation of the facts rather than to be told what I should think. It feels as if I am reading propaganda despite the seriousness of the issues.

As for structure, I would have preferred to see the book start with some kind of historical perspective, talking about Limits of Growth etc, before then going on to explain the geopolitical context (such as Zbigniew Brzezinski's the Grand Chessboard). That is, the current economic situation in the US and Europe vs BRIC etc, the US objectives in Afghanistan, Pakistan, Iraq and so on. We get none of this. All in all the coverage seems patchy, with too much time spent on some areas not enough on others. Flicking through the chapters I expected to see one entitled "Water Security", but nothing.

Instead of this, the book starts with the story of a Russian submarine captain planting a flag on the floor of the arctic. Flicking through the chapters reveals a similar anecdote at the start of each chapter.

I have to say that I find this book almost unreadable. I would give it 1 star of it was not for the fact that the chosen topic is so important. Even a bad book is better than no book, and I commend the authors attempt to bring this important subject matter to peoples attention.

If anyone knows of a serious treatment of this topic, that reads less like propaganda, and is far less insulting to the intelligence of the reader, then I would love to know of it. I thought this might be the definitive version on the topic. If anything, this kind of rhetoric actually undermines the arguments in favour of a serious analysis of global resource depletion.
3223435
OK movie, but factual information was way off.
3170087
Is not all that I had anticipated from this over-rated expositor.