& FREE Returns

FREE delivery: Monday, July 26 Details

Only 1 left in stock (more on the way).
As an alternative, the Kindle eBook is available now and can be read on any device with the free Kindle app.

$$25.00 () Includes selected options. Includes initial monthly payment and selected options. Details

Secure transaction

Ships from	Amazon.com
Sold by	Amazon.com

Details

Ships from

Amazon.com

Sold by

Amazon.com

Return policy: This item is returnable

Add a gift receipt for easy returns

FREE delivery: July 23 - 28

Used: Very Good | Details

Sold by Bayside Book Sales

Other Sellers on Amazon

$21.36
& FREE Shipping

Sold by: YourOnlineBookstore

Flip to back Flip to front

Listen Playing... Paused You're listening to a sample of the Audible audio edition.
Learn more

See all 2 images

Follow the Author

John Grant

Denying Science: Conspiracy Theories, Media Distortions, and the War Against Reality Hardcover – August 23, 2011

by John Grant (Author)

15 ratings

See all formats and editions

Price

New from

Used from

Kindle

"Please retry"

$17.99

—

Hardcover

"Please retry"

$25.00

$21.36

$2.97

Is global warming just scaremongering by climatologists conspiring to protect their jobs? Is evolution "just a theory"? Is autism caused by vaccinations? The answer to all of these questions is, of course, no. The scientific evidence is now in, and it's conclusive, on these and many more issues that are fundamental to our knowledge and wellbeing. But you'd never know this if all of your information came from the popular media or your upbringing and immediate circle of influence didn't include critical thinking and basic scientific literacy.As this witty book with a very serious message shows, our culture has in recent decades been characterized by a widespread antagonism toward science and the not-always-welcome messages it brings. Large sections of the supposedly sophisticated populations in the developed nations are in an active state of denial. Not only do they deny scientific evidence but they also call into question the very competence of science as a descriptor of reality. In short, they deny reality. The author surveys the gamut of clearly unscientific ideas concerning the food we eat, the medicines and potions we are either afraid of or advised to take, our sex preferences, and a host of other issues that are raised by various panics, urban legends, and a general climate of misinformation. He also examines how special interests, from agribusiness to pharmaceutical companies to creationists, actively work to distort or suppress scientific findings. While the tendency may be to laugh at some of the ridiculous notions catalogued in the author's overview of bogus ideas, the overall picture he creates is anything but funny. This book reminds the reader that the future of free, increasingly complex societies depends on an educated citizenry that is able to think clearly and critically based on reliable information.

Print length

374 pages
Language

English
Publisher

Prometheus
Publication date

August 23, 2011
Dimensions

6.24 x 1.03 x 9.29 inches
ISBN-10

1616143991
ISBN-13

978-1616143992
See all details

Special offers and product promotions

Amazon Business: Make the most of your Amazon Business account with exclusive tools and savings. Login now

Editorial Reviews

Review

"John Grant is the living heir of Martin Gardner. He delivers the facts and suffers no fools." --Gregory Frost, author of Shadowbridge

"This is the book you've been waiting for. Timely, encyclopedic, and compulsively readable, Denying Science makes sense of the whole ugly business of science denial. Buy two and send one to your congressman." --Michael Swanwick, author of Dancing with Bears and Bones of the Earth

"A timely and intelligent dissection of all that is wrong with popular responses to science. This articulate and impassioned account of the workings of the world should be required reading for decision-makers everywhere. Hang on: that's all of us." --Keith Brooke, PhD, author, The Accord, Genetopia, and alt.human

"Packed with damning facts and deadly wit, this book shows how we're being lied to on an industrial scale. A fine piece of intellectual anti-virus software!" --Ken MacLeod, science fiction writer

"For the past few years, John Grant has been intrepidly documenting instances of bogus, corrupted, and discarded science. Now he's back with perhaps the best of the lot: Denying Science. As topical and as cutting as past volumes have been, Denying Science gets to the heart of the problem in today's world—and does so with fascinating, brilliantly written accounts that may curl your toes but also contain elements of humor and absurdity. Highly recommended." --Jeff VanderMeer, World Fantasy Award winner, author of The Steampunk Bible

About the Author

John Grant is the author of more than seventy books, including the critically acclaimed Discarded Science, Corrupted Science, and Bogus Science. In addition to his popular science writing, Grant is a prolific science fiction and fantasy writer. He has won two Hugo Awards, the World Fantasy Award, the Locus Award, and a number of other international literary awards. He coedited with John Clute The Encyclopedia of Fantasy and wrote all three editions of The Encyclopedia of Walt Disney’s Animated Characters; both encyclopedias are standard reference works in their field. Under his real name, Paul Barnett, he has written several books and run the world-famous fantasy-art-book imprint Paper Tiger, for this latter work winning a Chesley Award and a nomination for the World Fantasy Award. For more on this prolific author, see www.johngrantpaulbarnett.com.

Product details

Publisher ‏ : ‎ Prometheus (August 23, 2011)
Language ‏ : ‎ English
Hardcover ‏ : ‎ 374 pages
ISBN-10 ‏ : ‎ 1616143991
ISBN-13 ‏ : ‎ 978-1616143992
Item Weight ‏ : ‎ 1.42 pounds
Dimensions ‏ : ‎ 6.24 x 1.03 x 9.29 inches

Best Sellers Rank: #2,976,330 in Books (See Top 100 in Books)
- #14,941 in Evolution (Books)
- #15,106 in Communication & Media Studies

Customer Reviews:
15 ratings

Customer reviews

5 star		9%
4 star		47%
3 star		18%
2 star		9%
1 star		18%

How are ratings calculated?

Top reviews from the United States

There was a problem filtering reviews right now. Please try again later.

Amazon Customer

Good, but by no means phenomenal.

Reviewed in the United States on September 7, 2014

Verified Purchase

A very decent book overall. Mr. Grant seems to tread over fairly well trod ground, which is not to his necessarily to his detriment, but let it serve as a warning that 99% of the material you'll find in this book, you'll find in other books in the field of scientific rationalism and skepticism.

From what I can see, he seems to be quiet a robust writer, publishing over 70 books according to his Amazon page. Given this, if I were able to speak to him directly my own recommendation would be that he spend more time organizing and proofreading his writing. While the content is good, the rather disjointed style plagued with quasi-frequent typos (not as to be glaring, but definitely noticeable) definitely distract from the reader's enjoyment and edification. Had he written perhaps 7-8 fewer books, and spent 10% more time fine-tuning the others, they would greatly benefit from the extra attention.

One person found this helpful

Helpful

David W. Brooke

Factorama Bringing Intense Subjects to Life

Reviewed in the United States on December 4, 2011

Verified Purchase

In a battle between liberal science and republican Ann Coulter I wrote a dueling review pitting this book against Ann Coulter's Demonic here: [...]

This book is a great way to hear the other side of popular scientific topics that have hit the news in the last 5 years. With FOX news and media outlets focusing on the big controversial story over actual scientific fact, this book is a necessary response everyone should read.

The greenhouse effect, autism linked to vaccinations, creationism and AIDS controversies to name a few. With 38 pages of citations and a huge bibliography the book has its fair share of sources and proof. The book reads like a very good essay on each subject that culls together many bits and pieces to strengthen the authors arguments. This tends to read as if the author doesn't know much for himself, but it's necessary in order to speak towards such edgy issues of today.

This is a quick read that doesn't spend much time on issues, but rather lays down an argument and slam dunks it. At times this can read a bit slanted, something similar to a politicians take on an issue, but many of the points made in this book I was unaware of. I think this book shouldn't be read as an end all be all on every issue, but it makes some very interesting connections and brings up some great points many are unaware of.

Much like "The Wrecking Crew" or other political spin books, this book does ridicule and make fun of those that go against the books arguments. I tended to read them as funny knocks for entertainment value than debasing comments to strengthen the argument. That said because it strays from fact with opinion in this regard the book loses some of its argumentative strength. Be it as it may, the facts remain the same, and I'd be hard pressed to not recommend this book.

7 people found this helpful

Helpful

Paul Vjecsner

Corrupting science

Reviewed in the United States on November 21, 2012

Verified Purchase

Although the author is no scientist, he repeatedly denounces opponents of his views as unqualified in the science considered. In the process he glaringly and lengthily engages in logical fallacies while presuming to criticize others for illogicalities (e.g. p.299).

On that page he defends the "reality" of global warming because of scientific consensus, but says: "Science was wrong about phlogiston; this doesn't imply it's wrong about Relativity". In other words, although consensus, on which he steadfastly bases his unwavering faith in science throughout the book, was admittedly often wrong in the past, it somehow must be right where currently favored.

The logical fallacies he engages in are "ad hominem"--personal attacks as pointed out by other reviewers and as done with elaborate vehemence perhaps unsurpassed--the already indicated constant "appeal to authority", and others like "arguing from ignorance" and "question begging".

Of the last two, arguing from ignorance occurs in his saying (p.241) that among "928 randomly selected scientific papers that contained the words 'global climate change'...not one concluded global warming wasn't happening or that our use of fossil fuels wasn't primarily responsible". This is to imply that the climate change is happening. But one cannot infer from not knowing that not-A (that climate change wasn't happening) that A (it is happening).

The other of the two fallacies, question begging, occurs in his contending (p.158): "Using [the opponent's argument about the second law of thermodynamics], we can demonstrate that it's impossible for a baby to arise from the fusion of an undifferentiated sperm cell with an undifferentiated egg cell, and for an adult to develop from a baby. Since both processes indubitably do happen, there must be something wrong with the argument". But the argument is valid. The law in question, the "law of increasing entropy" speaks of increasing disorder, owing to aimless action of physical forces. However, a baby and adult result in an order. Now, if entropy is to apply to them, then their order begs the question of the soundness of the law. Our author tries to wiggle out of the problem by suggesting, "the approach of real science would be to question the second law". But the law is not questioned, despite continued problems of reconciling life sciences with it.

The problem is indeed deeper than may be presumed. It reaches into fundamental biological issues, involving evolutionary theory. Among the "deniers" our author attacks, those questioning natural selection play a principal role. Personally I find the allusion to Holocaust deniers disgusting, there being no guilt in questioning allegedly scientific pronouncements, even if from ignorance. In fact I see alleged facts of evolution, which our author so unquestioningly supports, as not only implicated in horrors of the 20th century, but as demonstrably false.

He writes, "any connection between the Holocaust and Darwinism is tenuous at best" and, "even if Darwinism had led to the Holocaust, that wouldn't mean that Darwinism was bad, wrong, or false science" (pp.190-1). A connection "tenuous at best"? He recognizes "the Nazi version of evolutionary science--hugely perverted as it was by the need for conformity with Aryan supremacist mythology". There is correspondingly nothing tenuous in this result of Darwin's hugely influential work, which speaks at the start of "the preservation of favoured races in the struggle for life", or says, "let the strongest live and the weakest die".

And although science that leads to bad results needn't be wrong, Darwinism is wrong in its very claims leading to those results. Our author writes (p.150): "A major difference between Darwin's scheme of evolution and the earlier ideas along similar lines is that he saw no purposeful directedness in evolution, no teleology. There was no force, supernatural or otherwise, guiding evolution". "Supernatural of otherwise" is a good characterization, because a stumbling block has been science's unwillingness to consider anything outside the natural realm, whatever is meant by it. And if meant by it is what is observable in the physical world (and what about the constant inferences as a result?), one can indeed observe "directedness", "guidance", in organisms, in the ways they adapt, as required by Darwinism. It is perhaps too obvious to be noticed that live organisms, like our bodies, are by the very virtue of being alive directed throughout toward the goal of self-preservation. One need only consider the digestive system and all its elements in serving nutrition, as do other parts of the body function to preserve it. This goal-directedness, teleology, being right under our noses, is thus overlooked in our reasoning, preoccupied with the preconception that everything physical must lack such goal-directedness. This reasoning of course leads to the Darwinian concept of only unguided occurrences in the organism, with favorable occurrences making the organism survive, and unfavorable ones making it perish. But instead, all organisms are keyed toward survival, with none of them therefore "favoured" to the exclusion of others, as the tragic theory would have it.

4 people found this helpful

Helpful

Forceful, Witty, and Effective

Reviewed in the United States on December 20, 2011

First of all let's just accept what this book is not. It's not balanced, it's not a comprehensive critique of any one topic, it's not without sharp attacks on what the author considers nonsense and yes attacks on the promulgators of said nonsense. What it is though is a witty romp through the fantasy land of those denying science. And in that it is very effective. Grant does a very good job showing that the deniers are often funded by special interest corporations, are in the extreme minority of relevant scientists, are often not even in a relevant scientific field, get way more press than their stance deserves, spew reams of false claims, use questionable tactics, etc.

This is exactly the kind of book we need to educate intelligent readers on the problem. Many smart people believe the nonsense and I know that because I know many of them. This book does not claim to be a comprehensive defense of biological evolution or climate science or any other topic it touches upon and it should not be judged as such. What it attempts to do, which is skewer the deniers, it does very well. Besides it was fun to read. Highly recommended.

6 people found this helpful

Helpful

Top reviews from other countries

Dr. P. R. Lewis

A new Nostrodamus

Reviewed in the United Kingdom on December 3, 2014

Verified Purchase

Following earlier books on similar themes, the latest work by John Grant suggests that science is under attack by various global warming deniers, creationists and others. It is a familiar tactic of such writers who try to group totally different protagonists all together under the same roof, and a tactic which is quite unconvincing to the average reader. The medics who associated autism with vaccination against various childhood diseases have long been shown to be wrong, but the disproof of their hypothesis is surely strong validation of the scientific method. Evolution and its neo-Darwinist proponents are often dogmatic and zealous in promoting natural selection, but science has a way of questioning even long-held beliefs, as the recent results on so-called junk DNA have shown very clearly. But when Grant moves on to the idea of anthropogenic global warming, his arguments are febrile and highly selective. Skepticism lies at the heart of the scientific method, a fact Grant cannot concede, perhaps because of his own lack of scientific qualifications, He accepts without questioning the increasingly futile predictions of the IPCC, despite many contradictions from the real world. Those include such undeniable facts as the growth of the Antarctic ice shelves, and the flatlining of earth global temperatures. Both Grant will not let facts get in the way of his own prejudices....especially when it comes to damning warming sceptics, and he even has the effrontery to include a listing of notable critics at the back of this book. The author is clearly in denial of much basic science, such as the essential and vital role that CO2 plays in the world eco-system. He down plays the well known period known as the Medieval Warm Period, despite the fact that the Vikings were able to use that warmth to colonise Greenland and exp[lore North America. He also downplays the Little Ice Age which followed, and led to the demise of the Greenland colonies, despite the widespread metereological and other information which show how devastating the low temperatures were on human existence, especially in Europe. John Grant has written many books, but most are in the area of science fiction or fantasy, and this book should sit in the same genre. Avoid this book and read better critiques of current science policies.

2 people found this helpful

See all reviews