Responses to Reviewers of Science Declares Our Univrse IS Intelligently Designed
Many times books reviews are equivalent to "ballet box stuffing" in that they are not written as an actual appraisal of a books worth. Groups that do not want you to read a book for philosophic reasons not related to a book's worth have, in the past, flooded the world with negative reviews not actually related to the book's contents. Some reviews are based entirely upon the lack of appropriate experience with scientific discourse or ones refusal to learn newly discovered scientific methods. Even individuals with the appropriate training will dismiss a book's contents if they contradict their presuppositions. Sometimes many "flowery" reviews are also designed to present an overly favorable view of a book's contents. Sadly, it is not often allowed for an author to response to a review in the publication or at the site where the review appears. I will only comment upon the actual content of reviews if I find that it might tend to leave you with a wrong impression. I will response to reviews when I become aware of their content.
(1) [Amazon.com "David" 29 JAN 2003] The version now published has almost all typographical errors corrected. The book is not written for the specialized audience mentioned in one part of this review. It is almost clear that this is not the message David intends to convey. I wrote the book for a general audience with minor experiences in reading and studying rather simple scientific discourse.
(2) [Amazon.com G. Cole 21 MAY 2006] As I stated above, there would be reviews of this nature. Obviously, G Cole did not heed my warnings about having the appropriate background to appreciate this simplest form of scientific discourse. As I have stated, this book is designed for instruction and is not written on the level of a "comic-book." It only requires a basic level of experience with reading scientific discourse and does not require the implied higher level. This makes the Cole remarks rather foolish and without meaningful content. Simply compare Cole's remarks with those of David [29 JAN 2003]. If Cole had the required (minor) requisite background and had "studied" this material for say a month, or so, then Cole should have concluded that it is scientifically permissible to state that each natural-system and its behavior is designed by an intelligence. What more evidence for intelligent design could Cole desire than this?