Take a photo of a barcode or cover
cassianlamb 's review for:
I honestly loved this book. It was informative and entertaining, the exact thing I like in non-fiction books. What I didn't like was the author.
That may seem strange, and frankly, it kind of it. I want to remind you, this is a personal review, and should not be your main deciding factor in reading this book.
So, the reasons Nick Pyenson annoyed me are as follows: he disregards "whale huggers", thinks nicknames downplays the importance of something, and thinks everything in life is determined by death. Now, please excuse my following rant.
" Whale huggers" as he calls them, or "amature enthusiasts"by others, are what becomes scientists. Those people are so amazed by what they see that they want to learn more, and strive to do it now they can. They are the future of science. Pierson disapproves of this for unknown reasons. It's almost like he thinks you can't be fascinated to the point of obsession when interested by something. I mean, who would be like that? I'll give you the answer: scientists.
The author also claims nicknames of fossils and study subjects downplays the importance of something. He thinks that numbers are a better determining factor. Maybe they are, but you know why objects are named? Because someone cares. Dogs, cats, people, they are all named because of how much they mean to a person. A number is pure, cold science. It does not seem that important. In fact, it seems more like what you would do if trying to distance himself. That is not what Pyenson is trying to do, but it is what he does.
Finally, everything he says and writes is based off the dead animals before him. He guesses, and while he goes on tagging missions, it is simply to determine that what he knows from death is accurate. He does not look for much at all in his they behave or why they behave like that. Pyenson wants them to be inanimate, likely because he thinks he can understand them better that way. The problem is, it does not work like that. His idea is a good one, but it needs to be combined with other factors to be applicable. He needs someone who understands whales when they are alive to fully grasp what they are. He can learn a lot from death, but he can't learn everything.
This should not impede you if you want to read the book. In fact, I implode you to look into it. I am simply putting this out there to get my frustration s out, and to prepare you for when you do pick it up. The book is amazing, but the author is annoying.
That may seem strange, and frankly, it kind of it. I want to remind you, this is a personal review, and should not be your main deciding factor in reading this book.
So, the reasons Nick Pyenson annoyed me are as follows: he disregards "whale huggers", thinks nicknames downplays the importance of something, and thinks everything in life is determined by death. Now, please excuse my following rant.
" Whale huggers" as he calls them, or "amature enthusiasts"by others, are what becomes scientists. Those people are so amazed by what they see that they want to learn more, and strive to do it now they can. They are the future of science. Pierson disapproves of this for unknown reasons. It's almost like he thinks you can't be fascinated to the point of obsession when interested by something. I mean, who would be like that? I'll give you the answer: scientists.
The author also claims nicknames of fossils and study subjects downplays the importance of something. He thinks that numbers are a better determining factor. Maybe they are, but you know why objects are named? Because someone cares. Dogs, cats, people, they are all named because of how much they mean to a person. A number is pure, cold science. It does not seem that important. In fact, it seems more like what you would do if trying to distance himself. That is not what Pyenson is trying to do, but it is what he does.
Finally, everything he says and writes is based off the dead animals before him. He guesses, and while he goes on tagging missions, it is simply to determine that what he knows from death is accurate. He does not look for much at all in his they behave or why they behave like that. Pyenson wants them to be inanimate, likely because he thinks he can understand them better that way. The problem is, it does not work like that. His idea is a good one, but it needs to be combined with other factors to be applicable. He needs someone who understands whales when they are alive to fully grasp what they are. He can learn a lot from death, but he can't learn everything.
This should not impede you if you want to read the book. In fact, I implode you to look into it. I am simply putting this out there to get my frustration s out, and to prepare you for when you do pick it up. The book is amazing, but the author is annoying.