jcgallegosm

Juan Carlos Gallegos M Carlos Gallegos M itibaren Texas itibaren Texas

Okuyucu Juan Carlos Gallegos M Carlos Gallegos M itibaren Texas

Juan Carlos Gallegos M Carlos Gallegos M itibaren Texas

jcgallegosm

Apologies for the spoiler (never quite sure what constitutes a spoiler in non-fiction) but this book is best explained by one of the many hilarious/head-against-brick-wall insights found within. - you'll always find the science reporting in newspapers (and other mass medias) dummed down, however notice that the financial, sports and literature sections are not thusly treated - Bad Science is pretty much about what it says its about. In perhaps a similar vein to "The Republician War on Science" Goldacre reviews many a popular misconception, with a particular focus on health (the author having a medical background and all) and slams the glimmicky bussiness of alternative with hard science. Goldacre puts a slightly audacious, (but yet to be disproven) theory that much of the misconceptualisation of science comes from humanity majors working in the reporting industry and failing to, or actively neglecting to get the science right. Clearly, hard science won't give you as many headlines, or hold the interest of the public for long, however Goldacre outlines exactly what will, and has already gone wrong with bad science reporting. Sadly its hard to imagine this book making any difference where it counts. Maybe just maybe, someone might pick it up and learn a thing or to. Most likely this book will be read by those already mostly aligned with science, but its still a better world with this book in it than without.