George C. Cunningham

Not spectacular, not bad. This book is designed to be a point-by-point refutation of Francis Collin's claims about his faith in a personal god as being compatible with science. Well, many people, including a very vast majority of the world's scientists, that the two are not compatible. I don't think Cunningham has to make much effort to show the flaws, holes, logical fallacies, etc, that Collins presents in his book and thinking. Really don't need to make much of a stretch here. Unfortunately, I do think a couple of Cunningham's points tend to be weaker than preferable and he should have elaborated or made more of an effort to finish Collins off. Not as good as Dawkins and some of the other current intellectuals addressing these issues, but I think the author went out of his way to "dumb it down" and make his thesis and evidence as accessible to all laypeople as possible, thus making his book seem less intellectually impressive. That still doesn't diminish the authenticity and truth behind the points he makes. Solid, above average effort. Recommended.… (meer)

Will help any law firm create and maintain an effective and well-organized records management program, including administration and storage of client files and administrative records in all types of media. Firms will learn to implement an efficient information, document, and file retrieval system, thus reducing costs, avoiding ethics violations, and ensuring client satisfaction. In addition, the book covers legal and ethics compliance when it comes to management and retention of both paper and electronic files.… (meer)

How to write a bestseller in the busy atheist market? Simple. Inform your readers that this is going to be different (more respectful) than books by Hitchens, Dawkins, Harris, or Dennett. Then, write a book that says basically the same things they're saying, without that much difference, but throw in an occasional sneer about "militant" atheists. Overall, not a bad book, but a bit disappointing; I feel the author could have done his homework a bit better on some topics. Also, his brand of strong determinism is a bit too much when one is led to believe that, if he knows your genotype and your "behavioral type" (like we have any idea at all how to determine that with our current state of knowledge), he can predict every decision you will make. I pondered this as I was deciding mustard or mayonnaise on my sandwich, and decided he might be right, but he'd presented no evidence to that effect. Also, he has a bad habit when discussing the gospels of stating that there is "strong evidence" to support a historical Jesus - but never presents any of it, just leaving the reader to take his word for it in a book ostensibly about critical thinking. No matter what position a person holds on that question, this has to be intellectually unsatisfying, and it is a fairly regular technique, not just on that particular question, but on several others, as well. Overall, a rather weakish entry in the genre, and probably not much more acceptable to believers than the books of Dawkins, Hitchens, et al., for all his protestations of being less "shrill" (in this particular genre, shrill usually just means the person calling you that disagrees with you, so this author will no doubt receive the shrill designation from any believers, should they happen to read the book).… (meer)