"The Five Biggest Ideas In Science" is a great summary of intricate scientific theories. Cartoons, diagrams and humor help explain in lay terms what makes the five theories BIG to scientists and how the scientific method works. Lively discussions and relevant examples clearly define the topics for readers. Contributions of scientists that led to the current theories also give important historical information. Idea folders associated with each chapter lead readers in search of more information. This is a must read for anyone interested in how science works.

This book, appearing to be written for children, is itself a quantum leap in the wrong direction. The authors treat many complex topics with inaccuracy and superficiality. For example, they state the Egyptian pyramids were made of "relatively soft limestone...(that)...could be quarried with hard stone tools". The interior of the Great pyramid at Giza is partially made of hard granite, too hard to be the work of either stone or copper tools, and that pyramid appears to have initially had 144,000 sixteen- to twenty-ton limestone casing stones made to an accuracy of flatness of ten thousandths of an inch, undoubtedly impossible to accomplish with "stone tools". They attempt to dismiss various psi phenomena by citing a few examples of fraud and instances where something failed to work, ignoring the large body of fine scientific work (Houck, Radin, Puthoff & Targ, Hasted and many others) clearly establishing the reality of many of the various phenomena discussed. Instead of relying on any scientific data, the authors rely on hypotheses, the views of a magician and ridicule by a cartoonist. The book is an unworthy attempt at treating its subject matter, lumping real scientific phenomena with obvious error, such as holocaust denial, and itself represents pseudoscience and yellow journalism.

Whew! Quite a lot is covered in this small book, but very little detail is given as references. As a skeptic myself these authors were 'preaching to the choir' with me. I think their idea that "people who disagree with them" will read and possibly change their opinions is a bit far-fetched. This book is perfect for those who dabble on the edge of pseudoscience, sometimes leaning one way then the other. This gives easy to understand examples, and some ammo to fight off unscientific beliefs.

I would really have liked to see the authors use footnotes throughout the book as an aid to researchers. I know that they were right on with their claims, but would like to see where they got their information. The glossary was very helpful, and can see using it in the future. If you have a friend or relitive who is always bothering you with pseudoscience claims, and you never quite know how to explain your skepticism, then this is the book for you. Carry it on your person, always!

When we're younger, and think we have the whole world figured out, we look for patterns while also looking for a means to be different. What we are too often led to is the subject matter of this book.

The authors cover a whole series of fads and pseudosciences by which we're frequently insulted, e.g., astrology, tarot cards and I Ching, and a host of others. The subjects are handled with a bit of wit, but not the cutesy angle of the "idiots guide to..." books.

I'm pretty well read on skeptical literature so for me there was little new. However, the silly fads covered in the book are often considered far more acceptable than critical analysis or thinking. Therefore, the book should be assigned to maybe high school seniors or college freshmen, those inclined to fall into such traps, i.e., into believing such nonsense. At least, then, when they get through their post adolescent turmoil, they'll have had a direction, a reference to put the foolishness in perspective. I'm not so naive to think that young people won't pass through such fads--most of us did at one point or another in our lives. But, again, seeds will be planted when most mature to a more complicated world in which we rely on evidence to come to conclusions.

And they DO cover what constitutes a scientific examinination of something, i.e., a contrast to the "intuitive," testimonial or anecdote-based, or merely "faith" angle they're trying to refute. That is a valuable contribution to the seed for future critical thinking.

The book does, however, have its weaknesses. One petty one, for instance is that the authors referred to the Greek gods for whom the planets are names. I believe their named for ROMAN gods (the biggest, gas giant, for example, being Jupiter, not Zeus). And, in retrospect, I wish they'd covered some of the trendy "therapies" which are draining the pockets of many, who, after these functionless raps still think for some reason that they're morally superior to the rest of us. But I suppose they make up a different genre of the stuff of which we need to be wisely informed.

The book is a fine primer for those thus far ill-informed of its subject matter. As such, that's not a criticism but a perspective. It's a wonderful, step-by-step primer for those new to skepticism, e.g., young people experimenting with it or their parents trying to reason their kids off of astrology kicks and so forth. But I wouldn't recommend it to those who've read far more sophisticated stuff on the subjects already.