300 of 321 people found the following review helpful
on August 31, 2000
Radin's book was a surprise to me. I have been often interested in the paranormal, but have always felt it completely lacked any scientific truth, and was worth little more than entertainment. Eventually, I became very sceptical to any issues that could not be easily accepted by science. This book has made me think twice by finally providing some meta-analysis that convinced me to at least stop to wonder.
To keep it short, Radin basically claims that the paranormal is real and has proof of it. He starts by defining the concept of Psi, and dedicates many pages trying to explain you the mathematical and statistical background you will need to understand the studies and the meta-analysis of the results. Radin then proceeds to expose all the evidence that has been gathered for the past years, for Telepathy, Perception at a distance and through time, Mind-Matter interaction, Mental interaction with living organisms and field consciousness. His next theme dedicates 50 pages to explain the why scepticism has been limiting the knowledge of Psi phenomena, and even approaches some metaphysics.
The book is very well organized, there is some redundancy, but no more than normal and it is often necessary. Subjects are well separated and the index is very good. What impressed me most was perhaps the way Radin provides the reader with external sources that back up his claims. The text is full of marks to references. You have about 40 pages with notes and references, which you will be able to check for yourself. If Radin claims something you might want to confirm, it most likely tells you where to go find the original document. This aspect alone would be enough to separate this work from many of the pseudocience junk on the market.
You will be left under the impression that the experiences known as "psychic phenomena" are real. Radin never refuses the possibility that these phenomena might be fully understood by science in the future, losing its "paranormal" label, but dedicates his energy in trying to prove that they are no longer based solely upon faith or absorbing anecdotes, or even in few experiments - It shows that these phenomena exist because they have been evaluated in massive amounts of scientific evidence.
Carl Sagan said extraordinary claims demand extraordinary evidence, and Radin does provide most of the evidence. As younger scientists become aware of these matters and innovative corporations pour resources into psi investigation, there is no doubt that the scientific community is getting very, very curious about something that is going on but cannot be explained.
Radin is very persuasive, many people might not be impressed with his writing on sociology and metaphysics, but his technical expertise on the rest of the book is obvious.
This is a very dense book to review in a short space, so I'll end up by warning those who are expecting a lot of hocus-pocus, ghost stories and x-files scripts. This book has almost nothing of that, Radin only gives a few short "reports" as the intro, but he obviously gives them no value at all and instantly proceeds to crunching the numbers. The studies are sometimes a bit dry for those who are expecting Uri Geller moments (Uri isn't even mentioned) and it might appear as if you're reading something your college forced you to, but once you get interested, it will be a delicious read. Even if you feel you might be challenged by the studies, but you don't need to be a statistician to understand it, Radin will give you the basics. So be warned, it gets zero on the Ghostbusters scale. (In fact, in many parts I could almost see Radin shrugging and saying "well uh, we have no idea on why this happens, but we are completely sure that it does happen for no known reason". Lacking some impact for Hollywood perhaps, but still engaging. :-)
Radin has convinced me that psi phenomena have indeed considerable scientific evidence behind, but that unlike what many pseudo-science fans think, those effects are extremely subtle and hard to control for any good use, at least, at present time. They cannot, however, be ignored as non-existing, or the product of ignorant minds. Nobel Laureate in Physics Brian Josephson for instance said "Radin shows the evidence in favour of paranormal existence is overwhelming".
I highly recommend it. A powerful case for the reality of parapsychological phenomena. Very professional work in a subject that has been plagued by many pseudoscience titles that do nothing but add more noise. What it sometimes likes in fun, it provides in painstaking research.
If you are a sceptic, read it, no matter if you are religious or not, with a scientific background or not. If you buy anything you hear as true, read it too. Most of all, it will challenge you to weigh the facts and think for yourself. But one view is never enough. Be sure to read several of the best sceptical works (many of which Radin mentions in the text and References) and any other you find interesting (Demon Haunted World by Carl Sagan is a good title to start with) and you will understand everything better. Well worth the time. I look forward to Radin's next work.
74 of 82 people found the following review helpful
on February 3, 2009
This book came to my attention while waiting for a back-ordered copy of "Pauli and Jung: The Meeting of Two Great Minds". I became interested in the latter while listening to a review of it on National Public Radio. My interest in the relationship of traditional science and consciousness comes from a combination of training in the areas of applied mathematics, computer science and twenty-five years as a government engineer along with a Buddhist meditation practice of approximately five years. Thus I would describe myself as someone quite meticulous but willing to look for answers outside the box. It is from this perspective I wish to comment.
The first part of this book is dedicated to a brief explanation of statistical methods, ultimately intended as a foundation to support numerous studies suggesting that human perception is not strictly limited to the five senses (seeing, hearing, smelling, tasting and feeling). Some anecdotal evidence is also included. This evidence is presented not from the perspective of "why" but from the perspective of "what is". I found this part of the book to be compelling and a good read.
From there the story digresses into an attack on numerous incidences of ignorant behavior by skeptics, many of whom are other scientists commenting on related work, along with instruction about various forms of fallacy associated with their criticism. It is at this point that my interest began to wane. It's not that I cannot relate to the author's frustration in dealing with what is undoubtedly a great deal of prejudice and narrow-mindedness surrounding this subject. It's my belief that true knowledge or wisdom is never frustrated. But how can frustration arise when we arrive at a complete understanding of nature? Is not the apparent nature of others a direct product of their ignorance? I noticed a very similar approach to criticism in the author's post.
But it was in subsequent chapters that I decided to put the book down. There the author strays away from fact and into the area of conjecture. It's not conjecture per se that makes the final chapters of this book uninteresting, but the foundation of that conjecture. That foundation is based on the author's apparent ambiguity on conceptualization, both as a form of ignorance and fixation on the status quo as well as his reliance on conceptualizations to advance what could only be described as a "new age" perspective on the nature of reality. Compare "... the puzzling dualisms of objective versus subjective, inner versus outer, mind versus body, all dissolve into illusions created and sustained by the nature of language" to "The shock was that reductionism did not hold true when we got closer and closer to the ultimate constituents of matter. In those realms we were not able to maintain the subject-object distinctions required by the assumptions of classical science, and holistic and mentalist concepts began to take over." The final chapters of this book seem to be full with numerous "concepts" such as this. Can one offer numerous conceptualizations to advance the argument that reality is not a concept? The numerous quotations come across as a collection of platitudes, nothing new to be found there.
Regardless of the author's take on the statement by Ken Wilbur that "... the seer cannot see itself seeing...", it is critically important that we do "watch ourselves watching", because subjectivity is an essential element in understanding the nature of reality. Unfortunately too much of this book points to the apparent lack of introspection in others. I believe that the author would do himself and his audience a service by pointing that microscope back on himself.
If you are interested in more than statistics, I would recommend David Peat's Synchronicity: The Bridge Between Matter and Mind, that draws interesting physical parallels between consciousness and the physical world.
81 of 92 people found the following review helpful
on April 1, 2006
I consider Dr. Radin to be a man that takes a lot of heat for his experiments and beliefs. Whether or not you agree with him, I think this book shows that Dr. Radin didn't come to the conclusion that psi phenomenon are real overnight. He spent years investigating subtle aspects of "psi phenomena", analyzed large bodies of this type of experimental research, and learned to implement numerous statistical techniques. I do not consider him to be a "quack". Dean Radin is a dedicated scientist. Whether or not he is a misguided scientist depends upon your point of view. I am not convinced that he is misguided. This book has made me open to investigating more and learning more before I draw any conclusions. I simply am not sure what to believe.
Dean Radin has a very expressive and easy to read writing style. In addition, he has an uncanny ability to explain the ins and outs of statistics by utilizing simple analogies.
For me, this resulted in a book that I was able to read and digest very rapidly.
I decided to give the book 5 stars for all of the above reasons.
Potential psi research criticisms that were addressed reasonably well by Dr. Radin include:
1) The File Drawer problem
2) The problem of fraud
3) Statistical significance of results (ie. effect size)
4) Replicability of results
5) The use of Meta-analysis
6) Sensory Leakage
7) Randomization of tests
There is one area of criticism that I wish were addressed more thoroughly:
A fair amount of skepticism about psi phenomena appears to stem from the fact that so much of the evidence is based on "statistical deviations". Granted, (p) values are important, but isn't there even one form of psi that can be captured upon demand? Not one? How about a psi effect that can be looked at tangibly? Where is that? I understand Dr. Radin's point that psi phenomena are inherently complex, but there has to be at least one truly tangible demonstration of its effects. After all, parapsychology is a very broad field of inquiry.
Consider, for instance, that physicists can actually conduct a quantum teleportation experiment. It can be observed. Nobody can deny it anymore. With enough effort, it can be VISIBLY reproduced. Psychologists can give a rat a certain narcotic and OBSERVE its unusual behavior. Chemists can form compounds, and you can VIEW them with a microscope.
I mean there has to come a point where you actually isolate at least one aspect of a phenomenon and make it tangible. Statistics are inherently complex and there can be so many confounding factors that it's easy for skeptics to dismiss results one way or another.
For instance, I feel that parapsychologists need to find a way to create a tangible demonstration of psychokinesis so that skeptics will truly be lost for words. Not tangible with statistics, I mean truly tangible.
Personally, I would be elated if any of the following happened:
1) A large group of psychics is able to bend a piece of metal even a millionth of an inch under very tightly guarded conditions, the experiment having been designed and monitored by deeply affirmed skeptics. The psychics could try this as many times as they wanted to until they produced the effect. Surely the psychics could overcome the negative experimenter effect, at least once, given an unlimited number of trials?
2) A large group of psychics is able to move a very specific small electronic gadget a certain small distance or alter a very specific bit of information while under extremely controlled circumstances. The experiment would have to be monitored by skeptics. The psychics could attempt this as many times as they wanted to until they made it happen.
I am confused why this type of irrefutable evidence doesn't exist. Or does it exist, and the skeptics still denounce the results? Am I missing something here?
There has to be some VISIBLE, TANGIBLE, IRREFUTABLE evidence that mainstream science would be forced to accept. I doubt mainstream science would reject such evidence.
Without directly isolating an effect, and making it tangible, the skeptics will always play hardball.
34 of 42 people found the following review helpful
on August 3, 1999
Dean Radin's The Conscious Universe forever lays to rest anyquestion as to the experimentally demonstrated existence of at leastsome psychic (or "psi") phenomena. Using the statistical technique of meta-analysis, Radin methodically and forcefully examines the results from nearly a century of increasingly sophisticated experiments. Notwithstanding the possibility of thousands of researchers committing fraud in a massive decades-long conspiracy, or a complete misapplication and misunderstanding of meta-analysis, the existence of telepathy (mind-to-mind perception), clairvoyance (perception at distance), precognition (perception through time), psychokenesis (mind-matter interaction), and perhaps other psi phenomena (e.g., mental interactions with living organisms) is incontrovertible.
Now, a statement such as "forever lays to rest any question" may, to a careful audience, seem extreme. But that's just the point. If carefully read, Radin's thorough, relentless, and pointed volume will -- or should -- win over even the crustiest and most skeptical (but open-minded) mainstream scientist. The hows and whys of psychic phenomena remain unknown, but whether they occur is now settled. Post-Radin, a refusal to accept the reality of psychic phenomena is itself prima facie unscientific and untenable.
New Ideas are Accepted in Stages
In the Introduction, Radin describes how the acceptance of a new idea occurs in four stages. First, skeptics "confidently proclaim that the idea is impossible because it violates the Laws of Science"; second, "skeptics reluctantly concede that the idea is possible but that it is not very interesting" and its effects are extremely weak; third, the mainstream realizes the importance of the idea and "that its effects are much stronger and more pervasive than previously imagined"; and fourth, those who were originally skeptical now "proclaim that they thought of it first." With psi, we are currently in the most important and the most difficult of the four transitions -- from Stage 1 into Stage 2. While the idea itself is ancient, it has taken more that a century to demonstrate it conclusively in accordance with rigorous, scientific standards. This demonstration has accelerated Stage 2 acceptance, and Stage 3 can already be glimpsed on the horizon.
The book has 4 main parts: Motivation, which discusses science, replication (or reproducibility), and meta-analysis; Evidence, where meta-analysis is applied to the various types of psi research, and the leveraging of skeptics' objections into continually improving experimental designs is described; Understanding, which presents a field guide to skepticism and skeptics, a discussion of why scientists can't "see" psi, and a comparison between "Orthodox 'Separateness' Science" and psi-friendly "Proposed 'Wholeness' Science"); and finally, Implications, a short discussion of psi theory and what it might all mean.
Motivation and Evidence constitute the heart of the book. From the beginning, Radin is clear that "persuasive scientific evidence for psi requires independently replicated, controlled experiments." If psi is real, the skeptics ask, then why can't it just be repeatedly, reliably demonstrated? The answer is two-fold: (1) although a "simple," large-effect, repeatable psi demonstration may not be possible on demand, the same thing is true of most truly interesting problems in science, and (2) with the application of meta-analysis, it becomes clear that various types of replicated psi effects have been unambiguously demonstrated. In fact, "when psi research is judged by the same standards as any other scientific discipline, then the results are as consistent as those observed in the hardest of the hard sciences!"
Meta-Analysis: The Analysis of Analyses
Meta-analysis, the analysis of analyses, can be thought of as an integrative review or a "structured technique for exhaustively analyzing a complete body of experiments." Radin states that:
Meta-analysis has been described as 'a method of statistical analysis wherein the units of analysis are the results of independent studies, rather than the responses of individual subjects.' In a single experiment, the raw data points are typically the participants' individual responses. In meta-analysis, the raw data points are the results of separate experiments.
Thus, "by combining thousands of people's performances over hundreds of experiments, we can obtain very high levels of confidence about the existence of psi." Put another way, "when we combine results of many similar studies to form the equivalent of a single, grand experiment conducted by many experimenters, from many locations, over many years, we also substantially increase our confidence in the outcome.
Meta-analysis has exploded in popularity because behavioral, social, and medical sciences needed a "method of formally determining whether the highly variable effects measured in their experiments were replicable." Since data from similar but not identical experiments are combined, some reevaluation of the original data is needed. This leads to criticisms of mixing apples and oranges (which is fine if what you're after is facts about fruit), and the "file drawer problem," which insinuates that many unsuccessful experiments go unpublished, siting in file drawers and skewing results.
A comparison to aspirin studies is useful. Individual studies on aspirin reducing heart attacks were not very persuasive, but when many studies were combined, the aspirin effect was declared to be real. This, says Radin, is exactly what meta-analysis has done for psi experiments. Considered individually, some psi experiments have been successful but the effects did not appear to be easily repeatable. This uncertainty has fueled the skeptics' doubt for over a century. But when studies are combined, there is no doubt that the psi effects are real.
18 of 23 people found the following review helpful
on August 29, 1997
This is the single best book ever on the scientific struggle to understand the pervasive human experiences called psychic. Radin covers the 150 years of scientific parapsychology in a convincing manner that is readable and clear, even the complex statistics utilized in modern psychic science. The "truth is out there" and he lays it out beautifully. Psychic phenomena are real, period. The scientific data are piled deep and wide.
More important, he destroys the common extreme skeptical argument that "there is no credible data" in parapsychology. There is tons of it, replicated and refined. The skeptical positions are dissected carefully and refuted one by one, leaving the reader wondering about the motives for dogmatically attacking parapsychology and parapsychologists.
This is a dense book but it is accurate, exhaustively documented and well crafted. The author is highly credentialed and a good writer. Anybody interested in the strange and wonderful world of anomalous human experience will come away richer for the reading. The level of discourse just got kicked up a notch in this important area of human experience.
Jerry E. Wesch, Ph.D.
Health Psychology Consultation
7 of 8 people found the following review helpful
on January 30, 2011
This is a well-organized, thoughtful book that presents a persuasive, if not irrefutable, argument in support of the reality of psychic phenomena. Unlike other books on parapsychology that focus on strange anecdotal accounts of the paranormal, The Conscious Universe compiles evidence across a broad spectrum of studies and reports to make the case for the paranormal. The book includes many unique and interesting topics, such as field consciousness, where the author reports on studies suggesting that when millions of people focus on one event, such as the Academy Awards show or the O.J. Simpson slow-motion police chase, there is a corresponding increase in order as measured by a randon number generator. With the evidence in favor of psi so persuasive the author provides an examination of the psychological and sociological reasons modern science continues to oppose the reality of psi. These objections are summed up in Nobel prize-winning physicist, Steven Weinberg's, comment in his book, Dreams of a Final Theory: "We do not understand everything, but we understand enough to know that there is no room in our world for telekinesis or astrology. What possible physical signal from our brains could move distant objects and yet have no effect on scientific instruments?" (It is unclear, by the way, what Mr. Weinberg would say about the field consciousness experiments reported by Dr. Radin, the effects of which were measured by a scientific instrument.) Dr. Radin, like others in this field (see, for example, Charles Tart, The End of Materialism), attack this materialistic world model of modern science showing that, in light of the findings of the quantum theory, a wholly material world of independent objects does not in fact exist. Dr. Radin then tries to formulate some sort of metaphysics that would encompass both the findings of materialistic science and psychic phenomena. Although this part of the book (Ch. 15) is interesting, he winds up making a common error of those going down this path. (For other examples see The End of Materialism and The Physics of Consciousness.) Specifically, Dr. Radin tries to come up with a theory that is part materialistic and part spiritual. But this is a variation of the "ghost in the machine" problem: how can these wispy, ephemeral thoughts and emotions affect the brute matter of the material world? What is needed here is a metaphysics that does not force the round peg of spiritualism into the sqaure hole of materialism, or ignore the reality of the material world, but one that transcends both. Until paranormal researchers come upon this new worldview, they will be outside looking in.
13 of 16 people found the following review helpful
on May 19, 2006
This is a good book about psi research. Dean Radin shows the research done up to that point showing findings beyond chance in tests of mental activity like telekinesis, telepathy, and precognition. He is very careful in laying out the case. The cynicism that abounds in the scientific community about psi warrants a cautious approach, however.
Radin's new book Entangled Minds builds on this research, and should also be read; this book is a good primer, however.
11 of 14 people found the following review helpful
on September 21, 2012
My impressions and advice:
Readers mildly skeptical, cautiously open, and critically hopeful should read this book in equal measure. As a lucid and wide-ranging synopsis of psychical research, few texts provide as solid a base as this one for exploring academic parapsychology; the prodigous citations will delight those of scientific bent, while providing ample opportunity for verification to any whose interest ranges beyond this single book. Not only does Radin present his arguments in an incorrigibly academic manner, but he manages to do so with wit and insight as well. It is a book as accessible to the the scholar as to layman, and as such, an exemplar in its field.
Personally, I have had an intense interest in psychical research, I can affirm that it was this book, more than any other, that gave me the tools to fuel it, to explore it, and to to debate it with others. I once presented this book to a discerning and skeptical friend, and after he had read it I asked him his newfound opinion of parapsychology. He was thoroughly convinced.
My reponse to critical reviewers on "the file-drawer problem":
If you explore the 1 star reviews of this book, you will find numerous claims to the effect that a phenomenon called "the file-drawer" can explain away all of the results presented herein. Some of the reviewers who make these claims are scientists, and one of them (Jeff Scargle) has even published a paper in the Journal of Scientific Exploration - a well-known outlet for parapsychology. I thus consider their arguments worthy of careful thought and attention.
Before I tackle their claims directly, however, a little introduction to the file-drawer problem for those who may be unfamiliar with the concept: a file-drawer is basically a reservoir of unpublished studies. The idea is that these studies comprise primarily non-significant findings, such that if they were included in a meta-analyses (a statistical aggregation of all known, published studies), they would reduce the obsevered psi effect to non-significance (i.e. no better than chance).
This concern is a legitimate one, and it has implications for all the sciences, but there is strong reason to believe that its influence in parapsychology is minimal. This is because, in 1975, parapsychology became the first and only science to adopt an explicit policy against the file-drawer effect. As a result of this, the publishing of negative studies has become routine, and is strongly encouraged in parapsychology journals and conferences. In fact, in a further step against selective reporting, meta-analyses of psi research - again, uniquely among the sciences - regularly incorporate unpublished studies that have been presented at conferences (for peer review and quality control). Chris French, editor of the UK Skeptic, has been quoted as expressing amazement at the "enlightened policy of parapsychology journals towards publishing negative replications". These general facts should make one pause before declaring that the file-drawer can invalidate the results of these meta-analyses, but it is far from the best argument I can present.
Futher evidence comes from a statistical method developed by renowned psycologist and sociologist Robert Rosenthal, author of a popular book on meta-analysis. His procedure, called "Rosenthals fail-safe N", attempts to calculate the amount of non-significant studies that would be necessary to nullify the effect of a meta-analysis. According to author Chris Carter, Ray Hyman, widely recognized in the skeptical community as the most knowedgeable critic of parapsychology, once brought up to researcher Charles Honorton that the file-drawer might have been a viable explanation for the results obtained in a meta-analysis of ganzfeld studies (a type of psi experiement), but was forced to agree with Honorton that they could not when it was found that up to 15 unpublished, non-significant studies would have had to have been present for each significant study to account for the results.
Rosenthal's method is not without its critics, however, who argue that it overestimates the number of studies in the file-drawer by assuming that they are not just non-significant, but equally likely to be in the positive or the negative direction. They believe that instead, the file-drawer houses not just non-significant, but negative studies in great proportion. I disagree.
To assume that parapsychologists are selectively discarding only the most powerfully negative studies is to come pretty close to an accusation of fraud. It is one thing to say that an unconscious selection process tips parapsychologists towards publishing more significant studies than non-significant studies, but another thing entirely to argue that they could be unconsciously refusing to publish, specifically, the most obviously negative of their results. Given that there have only been two known instances of experimenter fraud in parapsycholgical research, it is untenable to entertain this idea.
Nevertheless, despite my disagreement, there is empirical evidence against the publication bias hypothesis that does not need my argument. In 1980, Susan Blackmore, a UK skeptic, conducted a survey of parapsychological research into the ganzfeld to try to get an estimate of the file-drawer effect. The questionnaire that was mailed returned 32 unreported studies, 12 of which were still in progress, and one that could not be analyzed. Of the 19 remaining, 14 were judged to have adequate methodology, including 5 significant studies, or 36% of the total, that had not been published for diverse reasons. When considered together, this proportion of significant results yields odds against chance of 2,342 to 1. Thus, because the file-drawer is positive overall, and its addition to the ganzfeld database would only add to the psi effect, no evidence for nullifying, unpublished studies was found. Additionally, this proportion of non-significant studies (36%) is not significantly different from that found in Honorton's 1985 meta-analysis (43%), and is consistent with chance variation.
Finally, there are calculations more conservative than Rosenthal's fail-safe N which have been used to safely rule out publication bias as a source of spurious psi results. The Darlington-Hayes forumla, for example, allows for a large proportion of the unpublished studies to be negative. Using this method, Storm et al showed, in their 2010 meta-analysis, that to nullify the results of the 108 examined ganzfeld studies published until that time would require about 95 unpublished, non-significant studies, of which 86 of these could be negatively directional. Such a large proportion of "psi missing" studies is very unlikely.
I almost forgot, there are pools of ganzfeld data that we know could not have suffered from the file-drawer problem. One of theses - the auto-ganzfeld - was developed in collaboration with skeptics and advocates and officially declared to have reported all of its 11 studies. The aggregate odds against chance from their database alone are more than 30,000 to 1.
If you wish to see more calculations, check Patrizio Tressoldi's most recent meta-analysis of nearly all areas of parapsychological study. He presents numbers for each field that equally, or even more certainly than those I showed above, rule out selective reporting.
In conclusion, it is clear that the file-drawer is a dead explanation - as empty as the file-drawers of parapsychologists.
18 of 24 people found the following review helpful
on December 6, 1999
Not for nearly a century, since the pioneering work of Myers, Podmore, Edgerton and Sidgwick, has anyone produced so exhaustive a survey of the scientific evidence for the existence of psi phenomena as Dean Radin in The Conscious Universe. Not only are his databases completely updated and comprehensive for each of the phenomena discussed--telepathy, clairvoyance, psychokinesis, precognition, etc.--enormous enough to overcome criticisms of selectivity or misrepresentation, his consistent use of statistical "meta-analysis" should forever quiet the dogma that there "must be" flaws in parapsychological statistics. Radin has demonstrated that it just ain't so! Nevertheless, The Conscious Universe will still not convince the diehard skeptics because its display of facts, however dazzling, does not in itself provide a theoretical bridge between the world of psi and the world of reductionistic scientism. Radin offers several tentative suggestions about the possible materials for constructing that bridge but is not overly sanguine about any of them. He says, for example, "An adequate theory of psi, however, will almost certainly not be quantum theory as it is presently understood. Instead, existing quantum theory will ultimately be seen as a special case of how nonliving matter behaves under certain circumstances." There are, however, metatheories already in progress and Radin can be confident that the bridge is, in fact, being built.
4 of 4 people found the following review helpful
on September 5, 2011
So far I like Dean Radin's book. It's detailed, informative and the author applies the scientific method to increase the validity of his work. I'm only about 2 chapters into the book and it still has my attention and interest. I am not happy with the editing of this book (and other Kindle books I've purchased). I'm sure the paperback version of this books has been proof-read, edited and checked for spelling and grammatical errors. Why doesn't that apply to the Kindle version. I have found over 2 dozen grammatical and spelling errors in the Kindle version and only 2 1/2 chapters into it. Most are spelling or words that should be one word broken into two, like, "be come" instead of become. They must use a text bridge to make the Kindle version and never edit or proof-read what it was converted into. I paid over $10 for this book and expect it to be a polished product like a paper-print version of the book. There has been several Kindle books I bought that have suffered this problem. Just because it's "electronic" copy of the book isn't an excuse for poor editing. I might go back to reading paper books because I can buy them used for less money, support local businesses and not put up with constant annoying grammatical errors.