nmcchristy's review against another edition
adventurous
challenging
informative
mysterious
reflective
medium-paced
3.5
amcloughlin's review against another edition
4.0
A pleasurable, informative, imaginative history of the unexplained.
ofliterarynature's review against another edition
4.0
Objectively good, I suppose, but I’ve never been much into alien abductions and conspiracy theories - and with how unnervingly present those theories have become in our mainstream politics, I really just didn’t get much enjoyment from this. I’d probably give it a 3 for enjoyment and say I wish there’d been more cryptids, but it seems pretty good as-is. I think I’ll stick with Ghostland.
binxthinx's review against another edition
4.0
Some sections are more interesting than others. Lots of really cool research and interpretations. I love when people try to understand major causes of why people believe the crazy crap they do. A little too much info on aliens- would’ve been nice to diversify more. Some generalizations are too broad or vague.
MANY chapters do not connect to the previous one except tangentially. Let’s talk about this weird thing....next chapter is completely different topic with no leadup. Horribly organized books. I do not understand all the subsections.
NITPICK ALERT:
VETERINARIANS GET TRAINING IN PATHOLOGY. It is correct to say they do not really get FORENSIC training. But saying we do not get PATHOLOGY training is absolutely false. It seems crazy to me that SO MANY large animal vets working on beef herds don’t recognize post-Mortem scavenging changes, but hey, I’ve seen cases where vets misinterpret it so I guess it’s not too surprising. A lot of large animal vets do their own field necropsies, so you’d think they’d learn these changes, but maybe these are areas where ranchers do their own necropsies?
It’s always hard being a medical professional reading non-science people trying to discuss other fields. There are some awkward half-truths and errors here and there. This book just shows how easy it is for poor wording to alter facts.
MANY chapters do not connect to the previous one except tangentially. Let’s talk about this weird thing....next chapter is completely different topic with no leadup. Horribly organized books. I do not understand all the subsections.
NITPICK ALERT:
VETERINARIANS GET TRAINING IN PATHOLOGY. It is correct to say they do not really get FORENSIC training. But saying we do not get PATHOLOGY training is absolutely false. It seems crazy to me that SO MANY large animal vets working on beef herds don’t recognize post-Mortem scavenging changes, but hey, I’ve seen cases where vets misinterpret it so I guess it’s not too surprising. A lot of large animal vets do their own field necropsies, so you’d think they’d learn these changes, but maybe these are areas where ranchers do their own necropsies?
It’s always hard being a medical professional reading non-science people trying to discuss other fields. There are some awkward half-truths and errors here and there. This book just shows how easy it is for poor wording to alter facts.