Hey hey-

The next book in the Bad Science series, "Bad Medicine", is on amazon.com now. It's not available until September, but that's still pretty cool.

Hmm, there is a Christopher Wanjek who is a standup comedian, and there is Christopher Wanjek, science writer at NASA, and there is a Christopher Wanjek who is a Washington, DC-based science and health writer. Are these all the same guy?

Yup. He's a Renaissance man, for sure.

... and who has written material for Rodney Dangerfield.

Should be an interesting book!

_________________
"... to strive, to seek, to find, and not to yield." - Tennyson, Ulysses

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: ToSeek on 2002-05-02 14:20 ]</font>

If I may...
Having read both Bad Astronomy and Bad Medicine, I can say that if BA's book delivers a classic cream pie to the hydra-headed monster that is Bad Astronomy, Wanjek's tends more toward the tossing of rotten vegetables --- a bit more pungent, perhaps, and certainly no less forgiving of those who would attempt to foster Bad Science.
(Removing salesperson's hat, redonning propeller beanie.)

And is there a third book in the works? And a fourth and a fifth ... ?

Or would that be telling?

__________________
Everything I need to know I learned through Googling.

I think it is The Universe Does Not Exist.

If only.

I can't resist mentioning that #3 will be Bad Weather; it's being written now. The fourth is on shakier ground, but, aptly, is slated to be The Bad Earth. And if I'm allowed to continue on this Bad spree, tops on my wish-list for #5 is Bad Math, followed by Bad Chemistry.

I should live so long....

I'm guessing, in ten or twenty years, you'll get around to Bad Eyesight.

Sadly, I'm already there, GoW, with the eye surgery scars to prove it. Though per Bad Med, I'm fairly certain the detached retina was not due to excessive reading (or excessive anything else, wink-wink-nudge).

Have you any interest in "Bad Logic?"

Silas

That'd be a good one; there's certainly a need. Unfortunately, there appear to be far fewer amateur logicians than there are amateur astronomers (who I believe are BA's main readership, not folks from the Other Side [however much they might get out of it]).

Hmm. This struck a chord...

I remember Wiley and Sons from my college textbook days (still have most of them, btw). Have you given any thought to marketing the "Bad" series as supplemental texts? The BA's book would be a great (and inexpensive!) supplement for frosh-soph astronomy courses. The other books should be equally marketable.

And this may provide the additional market necessary to make "Bad Logic" worth printing.

__________________
Never attribute to malice what can be adequately explained by ignorance or stupidity.
Isaac Asimov

Good idea; thanks. It's the sort of thing -- I think they call it synergy -- that tends to work much better in theory than in practice, but it's a fine suggestion nonetheless.

What are youse guys trying to do? INUNDATE ME? My personal library is already overloaded with TOO MANY BOOKS. I have quite a science library here at home. I shall need to retire in order to find time to read all my books before, well, you know...

*So many books, so little time...*

ljbrs [img]/phpBB/images/smiles/icon_biggrin.gif[/img] [img]/phpBB/images/smiles/icon_smile.gif[/img] [img]/phpBB/images/smiles/icon_wink.gif[/img] [img]/phpBB/images/smiles/icon_rolleyes.gif[/img] [img]/phpBB/images/smiles/icon_confused.gif[/img]

__________________
"There is in the universe neither center nor circumference." Giordano Bruno Born 1548. Torched 1600.

Well, this is my territory. I'll have to see this book when it's available and give you a brief note about it.

When is "Bad Astrology" scheduled for publication?

__________________
Life is like a box of chocolates. All of your choices are bad for you.

"Arachne Rising" by James Vogh. This is actually a hoax book by John T. Sladek, purporting to show that the 13th sign of the zodiac, Arachne, was "suppressed" in the Middle Ages.

(Sladek is also known for his book "The New Apocrypha," which demolishes the usual suspects: Von Daniken, Nostradamus, Homeopathy, etc. etc. Fun book! Belongs on anyone's bookshelf next to "Fads and Fallacies in the name of Science" by Martin Gardner.)

In another thread, someone mentioned Chet Raymo: well worth pursuing. My first exposure to him was his book "A Scientist at the Seashore."

Who the heck could ever find pseudoscience interesting, when the real thing is infinitely moreso -- and represents an honest search for truth?

Silas

<snip>

Surely you jest!
I well remember an ex-girlfriend of mine, who fervently believed in astrology, holding forth on "The Sign of the Spider", a new 13th sign of the Zodiac that needed to be incorporated into astrology. What's more, I seem to remember one of our yellow-press papers, the Sun or the Star, printing an article on the Spider in all seriousness.
This is going back (cough) 24 years. Could both have been derived from the impish Mr Sladek?

__________________
Garlic Bread?!?!

She wasn't the only one who fell for it. The theory is still followed by some few astrologers to this very day! But it was a hoax. A deliberate, silly, laughing-up-his-sleeve hoax; James Vogh was (the late and very much lamented) John T. Sladek, author of "The Mueller-Fokker Effect" and "The Reproductive System." (And "The Fork-Lift Truck," as he never tired of telling people...)

(He later said that "Arachne Rising" was one of the greatest wastes of time in his entire life. But it is funny!)

Silas

Two of my best long-time friends have two wonderful children who are BOTH Ophiuchans (a constellation which becomes a Sun Sign from 30 November to 17 December each year. I do not see the Astrologers taking note of it, but the constellation is definitely part of the Zodiac (if one is going to get *picky* about it).

It must be fun to respond to those silly questions, such as *What is your sign?* with the equally silly (but accurate from the standpoint of Sun signs) *Ophiuchus* and to wait for the questioner(s) to fall apart with indignation and/or consternation.

To have TWO children (their ONLY children) with the same *Sun sign* and a silly one at that must have been planned and is beyond the pale. (Perhaps February was a dull month.) Great kids, though!

Actually, all of our (silly) Sun Signs have changed in over 2000 years.

Read about it (among other interesting things) in Michael E. Bakich's *The Cambridge Guide to the Constellations*

ljbrs

_________________
*Nothing is more damaging to a new truth than an old error.* Goethe

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: ljbrs on 2002-05-31 21:20 ]</font>