Good myth-busting, but some deficiencies
346852
God's Battalions may one of those titles which is likely to create controversy, but controversy that may be necessary. Why? Perhaps because it is high time that the politically correct version of the `history' of the crusades presented so often in the media was challenged. All too often it seems, the crusades are presented as an unprovoked attack by bigoted Western religious fanatics against a peaceful civilisation and its `enlightened' populace.

Stark reveals that the reality was not so simple. I for one have heard or read before of Islamic aggression against Europe before the Crusades, and the conquest of much formerly Christian territory in North Africa and the Middle East, so this was nothing new to me, but it is useful in refuting the notion idea of the `unprovoked' crusades. The author however, goes further to challenge the notion that the Islamic culture was technologically and intellectually superior to that of Europe, demonstrating that many of the intellectual advances in fact seem to have been made largely by Jews, Christians other minority groups, or pre-Islamic cultures.

He also rejects the notion of the `dark ages', a term which is no longer favoured by historians, and argues that Western technology was actually superior to that of the East, which only triumphed in terms of `book learning'. Again, some of the above may be familiar territory considering my training in medieval history, though this first part of the book was altogether the more interesting.
As a historian the author's occasional criticism or apparent distrust of the writings of those of this profession is an position which I would be unlikely to entirely accept. My only other concern was one claim made by the author which I know to have been historically incorrect - that knights who wore plate armour `had to be lifted onto their horses with looms'. This was never the case in battle, only with the more elaborate suits of armour worn at jousts, and its inclusion may cause some questions over the historical validity of some details and claims. For the most part however, I think the work is generally reliable.

The second half did not seem nearly as interesting and engaging, and seems to get caught up in what were essentially just brief accounts of the major events and persons of the crusading period. There didn't seem to be any no real analysis, at least not in depth as one might expect from a more specialised history book, though this is not one of those. Rather it is an examination of the time period, and the major themes, trends and views thereof.
By arguing that there was indeed something in the stories of attacks on pilgrims, persecution of Christians and highlighting some of the massacres perpetrated by Islamic armies this work may do something to redress the imbalance of popular opinion against the crusades, and the `clashing civilisations' which took part in them. Also interesting was the mention of how some clergymen attempted to protect Jewish communities in the cities which crusaders targeted, demonstrating perhaps that anti-Semitic sentiments were not universally shared in the West.

Altogether God's Battalions is a worthwhile work, though perhaps it would have been better as a more dedicated study of misconceptions about the crusades. I understand that the author needed to give some overview of the main facts, but the way these took up much of the second half of the book, making it appear rather dull or dry, and seeming lack of analysis meant that I did not enjoy this as much as I could have. Also, whilst there are many good and worthwhile sources, I wouldn't take everything the author says as `gospel'.
2872650
The author does a good job of showing that Jesus Christ as described in the New Testament and by Christians has many qualities in common with Pagan mythologies and practices and that the current Christian claims about Jesus also applies to Harry Potter.

There are books available about the Pagan origins of both the Jesus Christ myth and valid historical studies regarding whether or not Jesus Christ actually existed. This one give a good overview of both subjects. However it has a few faults, including a bad mix up of the Mother-Father-Son trinity in various mythologies and wrongly naming Set as the "devourer" in the Ancient Egyptian judgement of the soul myth. He seems to cherry pick mythologies, as I know of some mythologies that would be "exceptions" to his claims.

Joseph Campbell did a much better job regarding comparative mythologies.
1980231
As a long-time experienced lucid dreamer who usually employs Dream-Initiated Lucid Dreaming (DILD) rather than WILD (Wake-Initiated Lucid Dreaming), I found there were both good and bad aspects to this book. The author - who by all accounts does seem to be very talented at WILD - professes the belief that virtually anyone can quite easily learn to do it, but in my experience most people find WILD to be rather difficult.

In the book, a single basic method for inducing lucid dreaming from a waking state is described. That method is presented clearly and succinctly, along with a couple of good relaxation techniques, and from what I know of WILD, it does seem to be a good method. However, the book only describes the author's personal method of WILD induction, and doesn't cover any other WILD induction methods (I know of some others).

One problem with the book is the speculative claims that go along with the basic WILD method presented.  It irritated me how he repeatedly attacks DILD in ways which seem unnecessary and even factually incorrect. At times the author seemed willing to admit that DILD and WILD are merely two different routes to the same state of mind, while at other times he strongly implies that the state of lucidity obtained with WILD is somehow qualitatively superior, without ever stating exactly how. In my own considerable experience, I have found that DILDs can be just as coherent and as conducive to rational experimentation within dreaming as WILDs. I also disliked how he ignores most of the current scientific research into dreaming, and how he often did not provide references for factual claims made. So even as he offered a decent method for WILD, he also spread a bit of misinformation about dreaming in general, swept most scientific results about dreaming under the rug, and speculated a bit grandiosely on some hypothesized eventual "importance" for lucid dreaming, without ever explicitly stating exactly what he believes that "importance" might turn out to be.

Another good aspect of the book is that no particularly far-out claims are made, such as that from inside a dream state one can "see the future" or do "out of body remote viewing" (as is asserted in many books on lucid dreaming), although such possibilities are not totally rejected.  In that respect, the book portrays a level-headed perspective.

Another weakness of the book is that inadequate tribute is paid to how one's personal expectations heavily shape lucid dreaming experiences, and sometimes without sufficient evidence the author seems to assume his personal experiences reflect general truths. For example, he implies that initiating dreaming while lying on one's right side vs. the left side results in entirely different "types" of dreaming (an assertion that is empirically unverified and could merely reflect his own personal expectations / theories). One major thing I have learned in my own lucid dreaming practices is that one's personal expectations are of *primary importance* when inhabiting a virtual reality your own mind creates.

The author does make clear that the major advantage of WILD - provided one is able to master it - is the ability to do lucid dreaming virtually at will, and to remain aware throughout the entire process, and that is truly an advantage.  But in my opinion he seriously exaggerates both the ease of mastering WILD, and the overall importance of the achievement if one does succeed, for in the end, as exciting and interesting as it can be, even lucid dreaming is still only... dreaming.
3971111
This is a good book, in that is has a wealth of information, but I am alarmed by some of the major inaccuracies. As an environmental health professional, I am concerned by the recommendation of nuts (esp. peanuts!) to children under one year of age, as well as the suggestion to home prepare spinach, which is specifically tested by baby food companies for nitrates. Moreover, the suggestion of giving babies 8 months and younger finger foods seems a little premature. Many babies at this age have only had first and second foods and will find more texture difficult.

Commercially prepared baby foods that are organic, and organic meats, are wonderfully healthy for babies, and I wish the author had been more attentive to these options.

The information is good, however, in that few other resources exist. A more concisely written, substantiated book would be a very useful addition to the literature.
1878572
It's obvious that Peter Boag is a well-intentioned scholar and that his subject matter is fascinating, unfortunately these details are not necessarily enough by themselves to make for a truly well-rounded piece.

The good: 'Re-Dressing' contains perhaps a surprising amount of crucial historical information, documenting something of the existence and lived experiences of a range of queer and otherwise gender-nonconforming individuals living in the United States during the later 'frontier period'. Delightfully, this diverse group of people contains men and women (who we today call both cis and trans) and several individuals who's self-understood gender identity remains obscure. Boag does more than many other historians to try to treat the subject matter with respect and he shows a sensitivity towards the critiques advanced by (mostly) trans scholars concerning this topic. The main evidence of this concern is that Boag makes (some) effort to use pronouns likely consistent with how historical figures understood themselves. Boag also pays more than a little attention to the sociopolitical forces that militate(d) against our remembering these figures within their proper historical context.

The bad: Boag's obviously laudable intentions do not make up for his obvious unfamiliarity with at least the most contemporary transgender theory/terminology. Boag uses pronouns inconsistently and in sometimes confusing ways (shifting pronouns depending on what point in a trans person's life history the narrative is focusing on). Likewise he uses frustratingly outdated (not to mention illogical) terms like "male bodied" and "the body of a man" (when in fact the body in question belongs to a woman) rather than the accurate and inoffensive "male assigned at birth" or similar. Additionally, while Boag treats some characters and topics at length, others are left described with what feels like more brevity than might be necessary, even granted the fragmentary nature of the source material. Highly consequential claims are sometimes presented and then simply left without supplying even hypothetical context or any hint as to whether a turn to the source material itself might produce more information on the topic (for example, did Eva Lind really "perfect a recipe to stop the growth of her beard" in the 1880s? Poor trans women everywhere want to know!).

I hope that the extent of my critique doesn't cause me to come off as ungrateful, Peter Boag has, with some obvious effort, produced an indispensable historical study with 'Re-Dressing'. As a young trans woman I constantly face society's eagerness to ignore my existence and thereby deny me the things that I need to survive. As such, anything that helps me to substantiate my own historicity ends up feeling pretty precious.
2205376
The first half of the book was excellent--wonderful appraisal of research that is not normally encountered. Very informative. Unfortunately the logic degenerates in the second half of the book, where the claim is made that the ideal diet is what Neolithic people ate...but earlier in the book it was pointed out that the average Neolith only lived to age 35. Hmmm. I understand his point of view, as he has been a diabetic for many years and cannot tolerate the carbohydrate load of the average American, but this approach is really only ideal for someone who is insulin resistant and/or diabetic and wants to manage their blood sugar without the help of modern pharmaceuticals. It may not be so perfect for all the rest of us. After all, longevity has not been linked to eating this way (although most centagenarians ate non-dwarf wheat in their formative years, which may have played a role). I respect his opinion and am delighted that this book was published, because again the first half of the book contains very useful information which we would all do well to apply. I confess that I did find the author's writing style to be off-putting, somewhat crass. Read it for information and not entertainment.
84558
The authors compiled 1,134 facts, tidbits, and stumpers for all baseball fans.  The book is mostly good, but has a glaring weakness in that there are more than a couple errors of fact.  On the good side, the book is a trivia book with a more educational feel, as some of the answers are informative explanations rather than short answers.  Who was baseball's youngest World Series MVP?  What cousin of Babe Ruth's wife went on to a hall-of-fame career primarily with the Cardinals?  What was the first team to print player names on uniforms?  There are many such questions that will amuse, befuddle, and stump even the most hardcore baseball fans.  Aficionados will spend hours with this informative, readable book, and will come away with better knowledge and ready to discuss with their friends.  Unfortunately, as has been stated in other reviews, the book has some errors of fact, among the most glaring being the first Jewish MVP (Hank Greenberg 1935, not Al Rosen 1953), and run scoring DH's (Paul Molitor outdone by Edgar Martinez).  Sadly, when you find a few errors, you wonder how many may exist.  Still, this is a fun, informative book.
838329
As a personal trainer who is 52, there are things I love about this book. But it has some significant flaws you should be aware of. While I love the validation given to over-50 lifters (yes, you have more wear and tear and should train differently), I would've appreciated a more moderate stance on some of his recommendations. This book is a reflection of the author's personal experiences, rather than the broad spectrum of fitness levels and injury histories.

Pros:
- It's realistic. Plyometrics, max lifts, and certain techniques like forced reps are not worth the risk once you've accumulated years of wear and tear.
- Along those same lines, I like how he points out that you can achieve results *without* these risky activities.
- I love the overall message to train muscles, not movements. It's refreshing to hear this message for the over-50 lifter. (However, it's a bit controversial to tell older folks they shouldn't train for function.)

Cons:
- It's not adequately explained WHY the over-50 crowd should use body-part training. He mentions that it helps avoid overtraining, but the explanation is very weak.
- I certainly do NOT agree that you have to give up barbells, pull-ups, core work, cardio, and battling ropes as you age. Unfortunately, I think the author applied his own personal experiences to everyone. Not all of us have beat up our bodies quite as badly as he has and continue to benefit from these exercises.
- I don't agree with recommending hormone replacement therapy for women. (And it's unclear what Abel recommends for women -testosterone or something else?)
- The author says we shouldn't do upright rows, then proceeds to put them in the workouts! He also includes behind-the-neck pull-downs, which are widely known to be unhealthy for the shoulders. He lost credibility in a big way here.
- The PA50 programs are difficult to understand (and I'm a personal trainer!).

Overall, I would recommend this book, as long as you know its pitfalls.
1854682
Although I am agnostic, religion is my favorite spectator sport.
Thats why I read this book.
The book was fascinating, but it had faults which an avid co-parishioner might miss.

<<<There are inaccuracies.>>>
It never fails: when a religionist of one persuasion criticizes other persuasions, he creates straw men.
That is true in this case, and Im glad that the earlier reviewers realize that.
In the chapter on Bahaism, which, incidentally, is a word which its adherents don't recognize, he states that Christ is accorded a position to that granted to Bahaullah.  That is not true.  According to the Bahais, all prophets are given the same revelation, but are only allowed to reveal as much as the people of the prophets own time could bear.  One might say that a later prophet is to an earlier prophet as a third grade teacher is to a second grade teacher.

<<<The author is inconsistent when it comes to science.>>>
In the chapter on astrology, he points out discrepancies between astrology and astronomy.  Yet on page 432, he takes a stab at evolutionary theory.  So lets agree with science only when its convenient!

<<<Much of what the author says about cults could also apply to his own religion.>>>

I have debated many cultists who affirm the authority of their messianic leader.  When pressed to explain how they decided to follow a man as god, the answer is the same: I just know.  So says our author on page 40.  But if he has a better explanation of why he follows Jesus, I missed it.
The list of cult traits on pages 16-18 is a dandy collection of boomerangs.
The first one is absolute loyalty, with actual or veiled threats to ones body or eternal spiritual condition.  And then he proceeds to rain H F and D down on all the cult members!
And if he doesnt think Christians are guilty of peer pressure, he is sadly mistaken.
Mainline Protestants may not be quite as guilty of Isolation from outside, but how is that different from Christian fellowship?
The term love-bombing can apply to almost any religious group.  Church members are glad to see you because they want you marching under their banner!
Probably the best one is unquestioning submission.  I used to know a person who grew up in a religious school.  When she asked about one of the church doctrines, the reply was an order to clean out all the radiators on Saturday morning.
Larson criticizes cult leaders for contradicting the New Testament, but a person living in New Testament times could have had just as much to say about Jesus.  How about the plethora of laws regarding the Sabbath?  And how about the eye-for-an-eye-and-a-tooth-for-a-tooth doctrine?
If you ask me, the only difference between a religion and a cult is the same is the difference between a tree and a shrub: one is larger than the other.
1382135
Some of the Christian mythology is notably flawed, which takes away from the author's credibility in all other aspects of the book.  Further to the author's credibility, Mr. Williams fails to cite references so that the reader can validate both the theological and scientific information presented.  The author does raise valid points, but more in the arena of why our children "should" be atheists, not why our children will be atheists.
4530870
I am fascinated by the neurological shortcuts that have evolved and which I believe make us poorly suited to the modern world we have created. Consequently, I was excited to read this book. However, even though it is well-written and easy to follow, I found the arguments a little too facile to hold on to. For instance, the overarching theme is that we all have built-in flaws, and that awareness of them will help us devise programs to overcome them. At no point in the book, though, is it convincingly shown that awareness can have a broad, lasting, positive effect. In fact, some of the examples (optimal interviewing technique, for instance) show the exact opposite. Additionally, I found the stylistic "outlines" at the beginning of each chapter somewhere on the continuum between distracting and annoying. Some of the anecdotes used to explain the different "sways" - a term that I still think would have been better expressed as "bias" - are interesting on their own; the section on "Who Wants to Be a Millionaire" displaying cultural differences in cognitive bias was fascinating. Overall, though, the book felt like a series of blog posts with no believable lasting conclusion. Nevertheless, for those who like the Malcolm Gladwell style of subject explication, this is an accessible book. For anyone looking for a deep discussion of cognitive bias, go elsewhere. (I realize as a write this that I may have fallen into one type of "sway" by giving it only three stars, since I clearly had expectations that were not met but which perhaps were unrealistic. Consequently, I may only have noted parts of the book that failed me rather than recognizing evidence in support of the opposite conclusion. I learned about that potential bias in Psychology 101, though, and did not need this book's reminder.)
2706981
Author has obviously read Margaret Mead & "The Myth of Monogamy: Fidelity and Infidelity in Animals and People" by David P. Barash and Judith Eve Lipton, and borrows her facts generously from the sources above.

However, while the above authors base their findings on hard science and/or personal observation (no matter how disputed Mead's work is these days), Helen Fisher is guilty of "bad science". At times, she leaps into definitive statements without any explanations or proof, at others she seems to start with a desired conclusion and then "stretches" her cases to fit the pre-made mind.

For example, she quickly dismisses group marriage with words "In fact, no Western experiment in group marriage has managed to thrive for more than a few years.", based on the single leader commune sucess rate (which fits more into a modified polygyny format). There are a number of serious studies of group marriage that document a very different picture of the sucess rate of these kinds of relationships, one of well known being a wonderfully thorough "Group Marriage - marriages of Three or More People, How and When They Work" by Larry L; Constantine and Joan M. Constantine. Author is obviously ignorant of this book and other such sources.

If you wish to read an entertaining book by an author who's well read but also bases her statements on the strong personal bias, Anatomy of Love is a good one - it'll get you emtionally involved, and probably scribbling your own responses on the edges of the pages. However, if you are looking for "hard" information on the subject, I suggest you go directly to the sources the author has used.
4656265
I had thought about rating this as four stars, but ... couldn't quite do it.

I do think, per other commenters, some of Dreger's claims are overarching, but not the ones they think are.

First, the science on the two main issues. I have long thought, as some of Dreger's interviewees do, that there are (at least) two types of transgenders. And, I think she's spot-on on intersex issues as well.

Second, on the issue of "social justice warriors." I've been caught in their crosshairs more than once myself, so I agree with Dreger here  overall. Read below for caveats.

Third, I agree with her that science, when properly done, can indeed be part of social activism. Beyond examples she mentions, an obvious one is DNA showing that human "races" don't exist.

Finally, contra some reviewers, I do NOT primarily consider this to be a biography.

==

That said, she's got a couple of swings and misses.

First, Elizabeth Loftus' work on memory is not quite as rock-solid as Dreger claims. And, Loftus has financial motive to claim that it is.

Second, PLENTY of non-SJW folks have a lot of problems with the shaky science of Ev Psych. Biologist friend Massimo Pigliucci is one. Philosopher of science Richard Buller has repeatedly shown its shortcomings, and refuted every attempt to refute him.

Dreger mentions none of this. No surprise that prominent Ev Psychers blurb the book.
283386
Mr. Hollander provides many well researched and compelling facts about the contribution of poverty to environmental degradation and the state of the global environment. However, many times through the book his facts and theories stand in direct contradiction to each other. For example, one of his most basic premises of his thesis is the necessity of democratic government, yet he repeatedly cites China as both a wild success and dismal failure depending on the current point he is trying to prove. This often creates a situation where it is difficult to discern exactly what he is advocating.
By addressing different issues in individual chapters the book is written with an easy to read layout, but as a by product it often fails to address how many of these issues are inter-related.
Also unfortunately for Mr. Hollander, many of the facts which he has cited from research conducted up until 1999 have since been updated to disprove some of his theories (such as the incidence of a rising number of hungry people since 2003, and the well documented spike in oil prices).
Overall, the book adds a valuable perspective in a debate that is increasingly becoming one-sided, but his lack of a cohesive well-rounded argument makes it difficult to view this book with as having any serious scientific clout.
426540
Like a lot of myths, the founding of Australia by 'convicts' is altogether a misleading statement.  Though the majority of people in the "First Fleet" had been consigned to 'transportation', if we are to believe Keneally, they were more schemers and scammers than violent criminals.  In addition there were a number of marines and government officials who would 'settle' down with convict-wives and start up some of Australia's most famous families.

Keneally only writes about the three "Fleets" that arrived in the first five years of immigration.  He has done his research into how the colony was started and what failed and what worked.  He has also taken the time to try to present the emotional effect on the original (The Eoras) society that existed at the time of Sydney's founding.  Unlike most histories, Keneally doesn't present the land as having been 'vacant' and only marginally occupied by the native people.  He tries to give a flavor as to how the Eoras viewed the Europeans who had settled in their midst.

My one negative comment about the book reflects a lack of historical back- ground on my part not Keneally.  I would guess that he wrote this book for home (Australian) consumption and therefore assumes that certain informa- tion would be evident to most readers.  Unfortunately, most Americans learn little or nothing about Australia and therefore it would have been nice if an appendix could have been added to clarify some situations that Keneally mentions that happened later, such as the Irish Rebellion of 1804 and the mutiny against Governor Bligh.
2385737
Book is entertaining; but the factual accuracy is dubious at best.
4207971
The many past reviews of this book cover most of the main points.  I, too, have found the book very convincingly written and argued, well worth serious consideration for those seeking optimal health and wellness.  However, there are some points that lead me to hesitate in my own case.  First, the book describes "total dental revision" (TDR), which is a fairly major, drastic intervention going far beyond merely replacing amalgam fillings with composite ones.  What is the success rate of TDR?  The book doesn't provide any statistics that I could find, but court information from Dr. Huggins' license revocation indicates a success rate of 85%.  Is that fully disclosed to TDR patients?  And what happens in the other 15% of cases?  The book doesn't say, except to emphasize that the "dental revision" needs to be "total" in order to have any chance (though still not necessarily 100%) of producing significant positive long-term health benefits.  For those who are already seriously ill, 85% may be a very attractive opportunity, and I completely concur that such treatment decisions ultimately should remain with the patients, with access to all the essential information they need to be fully informed ("informed consent").  I also agree that the current licensing system goes too far in penalizing innovators in medicine and dentistry, and that individual patients *can* make their own decisions about their own level of treatment as long as they have the necessary information -- especially if mainstream doctors are permitted to discuss alternative treatment possibilities freely with their patients without fear of losing their licenses to practice.

The book also fails to mention (as far as I noticed) what should be done to fill the gap between teeth when a tooth is extracted, other than making sure the extraction site is thoroughly cleaned out to prevent "cavitations" where anaerobic bacteria can hide and produce extremely harmful toxins.  I noticed another Amazon review by a dentist explaining that implants are the only way to prevent bone loss and eventual loss of additional teeth.  Yet Dr. Huggins strongly opposes implants and advocates removing them as part of a TDR.  Furthermore, a mainstream oral surgeon told me once that implants don't have very good life expectancy; he said five years is considered a "good outcome" for implants.  He also said there is no problem in not having an implant in place of the farthest back molar after the molar is extracted.  A mainstream dentist also told me that 5 years is the best minimum life expectancy for crowns, too, although my own crowns have lasted far longer.  Fortunately, I've always insisted on gold for my crowns (for durability), which apparently is far less toxic than nickel-ceramic crowns, according to Dr. Huggins (because of the nickel content, even in "stainless steel" form).

For additional perspective on Dr. Huggins, there is a very informative article about him on Wikipedia, titled "Hal Huggins."  The article seems to present a balanced and objective picture of his views, criticisms, successes and failures, with many references, including links to the court documents relating to Dr. Huggins' 1996 license revocation in Colorado.

I came to this book myself primarily out of curiosity about the professional association between Dr. Huggins and Dr. Thomas E. Levy, since I have long been highly interested in Dr. Levy's views regarding high-dose vitamin C and its use (in IV form) in Dr. Huggins' TDR procedures.  The book provides excellent additional background on how Dr. Levy met Dr. Huggins and how Dr. Levy's own health improved greatly after a TDR by Dr. Huggins.