My husband and I lived through Hugo also. We stayed in our home, mainly because the news crews chose our little town, 15 miles from the coast, to hole up in. None of us realized the magnitude of this storm until it was too late. We were the lucky ones, we managed to get through that horrible night basically unscathed. Others were not so lucky. I like the focus of the book being on surviving the storm and helping your fellow man, of which we saw a lot of. People would drive by, giving out food and ice and clean water. It made me realize there is still good in the world after all. Of course, a year after the storm we hightailed it up to Canada! I swore never again to go through such an experience. At least up here all we have to deal with is lots of snow!

My wife of 6 months and myself left N.Y. to live in Charleston S.C on June 11th 1989. We never in our young lives ever wish to see a storm of such magnitude.It was a living nightmare , your book was excellent . This storm generated more tornadoes than any other, the air force had clocked speeds of 240mph sustained gust.God bless the ones who were not so fortunate as we were.It was hell for months afterwards. Your book was realistic

My husband and I visited the virgin islands in 1989. After arriving on Saturday morning, a very strong wind and rain storm arrived, called Hurricane Hugo. The trama followed with hollowing winds, trees falling, people scrambling, loss of communication, and lots of confusion. We will never forget this week long vacation at this beatiful island. Your book does not do the storm and damage to visitors, people who reside on the island, people who have businesses on the island, and of course, those who own boats and planes in this island.

This is a great book if you're into Scottish history and/or time travel. The only drawbacks to me were I wish the story line had been extended at certain places (e.g. when one of the "historical" characters switched places with the "current time" character) and the only other thing that bothered me was that I thought the main character was a little "wimpy" (I mean, she's 40ish - not a teenager!)

But, having said that, I did really enjoy the book and would read this author's other works.

I'm delighted with Ms. Baker's style. It isn't often you find an author so adept at storytelling who also has a unique and beautiful command of the English language. I recommend this book to everyone. R

LEGACY is one of the most fascinating books I've ever read. The heroine is drawn deeper and deeper into the past as she tries to solve a mystery and save her own life. I couldn't stop reading

My kids have always loved this book. It has cute pictures, and a great recipe at the end for Mother Grumpy's Bumpy Cookies (chocolate cookies with chocolate chips). We have read it and then baked the cookies on several occasions. A fun way to spend an afternoon with your kids!

This is a great book, because my children love it, and I actually enjoy reading it to them. (Nothing artsy, philosophical, or weird about it; just fun.) It makes us all just crack up.

Very cute book for children and adults alike. Enjoyed the humor

Excellent pictoral of the Viet Nam era. Would especially like the author's email and a contact address for Rod Macon who is featured in the "special operations" section of this book for the purpose of research in the history of the War. and need Mr. Macon for a consultant.

Great book, my dad's friend gave it to me to read, i couldn`t put it down, and most the time i hate reading, but it read it very quickly, the fastest i have ever read a book, its so vivid, i can picture it, just the best book i have ever read!

Its very well made, chapter 1 starts with how each soldier joined, to the final chapter when they came home, Not a book about the author, but the lives of many vets, and told word for word by the vets.

Baker is an extraordinarily learned biologist, who approached the topic of race among humans with the same thoroughness that he brought to studying race among non-humans animals.

Much of his data comes from before political correctness completely enshrouded anthropology in the late 1960's, so the vocabulary often seems dated. Nonetheless, many of his views on the ancestry of different populations, based on morphology, linguistics, archaeology and the like, have been confirmed by recent genetic testing (see Cavalli-Sforza's "History and Geography of Human Genes" -- and, please, do read C-S' book, don't just satisfy yourself with C-S's deceitful cover stories about how poltically correct his finding are.)

Baker's focus in the concluding chapters is on different races' capabilities to found a civilization. He gives a 23 point test of whether a culture can be reasonably considered a civilization, and examines various races' accomplishments in this regard. This book is worth reading in tandem with Jared Diamond's Pulitzer prize-winning "Guns, Germs, and Steel," in which Diamond argues that every racial group in the world did as well as any other group could have with the resources of that region. Baker anticipated a number of Diamond's arguments and refutes them (e.g., could sub-Saharan Africans have put elephants to work like Asians and Carthaginains did?), but the truth probably lies somewhere between the two authors' views.

Baker's exploration of the capability of different groups to start true civiliations is certainly interesting, yet, I wonder how relevant this question is to the modern world. The Japanese, for example, have shown relatively little talent at originating a civilization, but vast skill at borrowing others' novel ideas and adapting and, often, improving them. Similarly, the question of whether Africans could have invented a civilization on their own is interesting, but it's not as germane as Baker seems to assume to the more pressing question of how African-Americans can best fit into the existing American civilization. Further, some groups that did little to build their own civilizations, and still seem to have a certain amount of trouble fitting into others' civilizations -- e.g., sub-Saharan Africans and the Irish -- have contributed an extraordinary amount to the culture of modern life.

Steve Sailer

It was a very wise choice to provide a thorough,yet comprehensive book that promotes such lucid exposure of racial differencies,in such manner that not only it won't left anybody to doubt the existence of that reality,but also to provide certain historical digression that includes historical development of concept that explains why study of race remains something like the last taboo among sociologist and biologist,given that exclusion of racial factor in such diverse studies-anthropological,ethnological,historical and one of clinical medicine-in the name of aprioristic egalitarian idealism and "political corectness" can lead to generation of false conclusions,as author exemplifies trough essays on ethnicity and pseudoethnicity in the case of Celts and question of origin of modern Jews.Also,a very well documentated discourse is given on such issues as intelectual diferences among various ethnic,racial and socioeconomic groups with regard to cognitive and powers of deduction.Wide range of immplication deriving from constitutional differences among selected races are given,for example in sport achievments.These and many other fundaments of racial anthropology are exposed in an extremely free of any prejudice manner,and although conclusions may left an impression of right-wing milleau,this is certainly not a specimen of pejorative racist literature.Although this book has been published first time in 1974,it will remain worth reading for a long time.It's fundamental in the process of understanding the meaning of race.

News and entertainment entities have almost always promoted the idea that to believe in any racial differences other than skin color means that you are uneducated and ignorant. A torrent of scholarly books on the explosive subject of race have disproved that dogma. In Part 1, Baker examines the historical thought on race, from the earliest attempts to define who we are, to the recent Hitler era. In Part 3, Baker approaches the issue from a biologic or taxonomic point of view. In order to diffuse the explosiveness of the issue, Dr. Baker examines the different races of various vertebrae animals and then moves on to more complex organisms -- humans. The differences in racial characteristics increases in proportion to how closely the subject is examined, and Dr. Baker examines racial features right down to the most detailed physical attributes. In Part 4, Dr. Baker examines the most critical attribute -- that of intelligence and race. It is here that Dr. Baker treads onto late twentieth century taboos. Dr. Baker's conclusion surprised me when I first read the book, though he tempers his understanding of racial inequality with the statement that "no one can claim superiority simply because he or she belongs to a particular ethnic taxon."

To those who either study Greek, or simply are curious about the meanings of the Scriptures, this is an excellently informative tool of insight. At this low price, every Christian can afford his own Greek Bible! I would encourage all to take advantage of the opportunity.

The hard cover edition printing is deficient as variations in text darkness are readily noted on many pages. Some pages (e.g. pp. 652-653) bore large ink blotches which are undesirable. The content is from the best Greek source text and the interlinear structure (literal translation) with footnoted textual references is excellent. A superb Greek-English interlinear New Testament based on the oldest unadulterated Greek text - Textus Receptus (1550). A must for the serious student/exegetor of the Word of God. Used with a companion Greek New Testament, Bruce Metzger, 66,68, 1975, United Bible Society, it is very helpful. A FIVE STAR book except for the printing deficiency noted.

Why?

There are several interlinear NTs (AKA, "ponies") available, some with words "Strong-coded," and/or more "up-to-date" translations, while others, like Berry, stick with the KJV and the Textus Receptus Greek. At least one includes a rather extensive concordance.

The advantage of this book is, as you can see at the bottom of the sample pages, they have included all the variations in the Greek texts that have been used as the bases for most of our newer translations. Therefore, when you see words added, omitted or changed in an English version, you can see from whence it came, assuming that it is not just a paraphrase, and determine whether the modification was justified, perhaps by the number of Greek texts that support the change, or by looking into the reliability of the texts involved.

I find this help invaluable, especially since the marginal notes are usually vague about alternative renderings of a passage, if they are given at all.

You many find that you may want to use other references too, such as a Strong's Concordance, and a Vine's Dictionary, although the included lexicon is not too shabby, but the extra effort is worth it.

Although this book has really bad plot, it is a very educative book, expecially for the young. It teaches about respect, and correcting ones wrongs. I recommend it for anyone who enjoys good character

I have not seen the movie, I heard it was scary for little kids. My 2 1/2 old loves this book, she asks for it again and again. I bought the CD and every time we get in the car she wants Lion King music. She knows all the characters, and even can tell me who is singing right from the book. Very well done. It gets the point across of what happens without being too scary (although I did have to explain to her why Mufasa can't come back anymore).

This book is so good it hits you--KABLAM! It's the best adaption of the movie. It's by far my favorite book

The question of how the gospels are best approached is a difficult one- do we focus on the sources underlying the gospels, do we try to understand how they changed their sources to better fit their own purposes in writing, do we harmonize them into one big messy gospel, or do we read them as literature?

The last approach, in my opinion, results in the most accurate interpretation of the text.

Bock's commentary (as is Stein's NAC contribution) is weak in this area. After reading it, you might be able to explain some of the pesky details of Luke that were unclear before, but you won't understand why Luke included what he did in his gospel, and why he put the stories in the order he did (It should not be assumed that any of the gospels are chronological. In Mark, practically the first thing Jesus does is call his disciples, but in Luke Jesus has a highly successful ministry going on already.) And, for the record, "orderly" doesn't necessarily mean chronological order.

For these reasons, the following commentaries would make better choices:

Charles Talbert: Reading Luke: A Literary and Theological Commentary. This commentary answers the question of why Luke placed the calling of the disciples where he did, along with other vexing problems. A very good commentary.

Robert Tannehill: The Narrative Unity of Luke-Acts: A Literary Interpretation. Vol. 1. This commentary approaches Luke thematically, and shows how Luke weaves several literary strands throughout Luke and Acts. He also does an excellent job showing how Luke and Acts help interpret each other. However, because it is thematic, it should be combined with other commentaries.

Joseph Fitzmyer: The Gospel According to Luke. This commentary provides some literary analysis, along with some good redactional work. Use this to flesh out the other two commentaries.

Nothing even comes close to this monumental work on Luke by Darrell Bock. The format of this series is just excellent and I wish we could see some new volumes! At any rate, Bock has simply provided us with the most thorough exegesis of Luke that has ever appeared. Technical, yet lucid. Tremendous background information! Much synoptic interaction. A veritable feast of Greek helps. Critical interaction, including direct interaction with the "Jesus Seminar" at many points. These volumes are worth the price and will provide you with a wealth of information on Luke's gospel. Thanks to Darrell Bock for this excellent work!

This commentary is great for pastors and scholars. I was using lots of other commentaries in Luke until i got this one. And this one by far has the better insights. And the print is really large for an academic book like this, too. Which is another big plus if your eyes get tired.

The author of this volume got off to a good start. He began logically with a history of what purports to be "psychotherapy." Many of the practices were brutal, barbaric, and served no purpose in the rehabilitation of the patients in the institutions that used them. Much of that, in fact, continues today. One chapter ended with something more innocuous, Eye Movement Desensitization Therapy, a fad of today's practitioners. I'm not sure why Baker slipped that in where he did, except to point out that it is a "therapy" of no scientifically validated purpose (except perhaps of economics: It lines the wallets of those who practice it.)

There is a lot to say about psychotherapy's shortcomings. What does it do? More, on what "theories" is it based? Baker covers Freud, the father of the practice. He quotes researchers who found that Freud had his "insights" while under the influence of cocaine. Thus, these insights were at best questionable. Put under the tool of scientific scrutiny, they're even more questionable. And Jung is no better.

The author, while beginning to cover those theorticians' shortcomings, was distracted by items of which a critic could easily say, "those are the exception," for instance of therapists who sexually abused their clients. What's more, the ones he covered lost thier licenses or whatever permitted them to practice. His argument thereby was lost in that those he criticzed lost their practices anyway! So Baker's excess coverage of much of this was of little critical value.

There's so much more he could have covered on the irrelevance of psychotherapy. Take, for instance, dream therapy, or Rohrschach tests. What they have in common is that they're totally subjective, of no substance at all beyond the theories of a couple of egomaniacs like Freud and Jung. Yet people are spending billions on them.

Of further concern to me is the issue of AUTHORITY. People seeing psychotherapists inadertently give them a great deal of authority, to interpret dreams, to interpret their "unconscious" and on and on. Based on what?... Put in that context, the least one might to is to challenge that authority, not succumb to it. Baker's coverage of that is limited to the control therapists have over their charge. He argues that's what attracts people to the "profession" of therapist. With that I agree, but I think the authority issue goes deeper than that, into, again, on what dubious grounds people give that authority to others with a few letters after their names.

In addition, the narrow standards by which society and its psychological "experts" define "normal" are not only so narrow as to be comical, but more based on image than reality. How many historical figures' behavior--the behavior outside of the public eye, anyway--would be aberrant by the standards of the therapeutic state? Where would be be without those figures' talents? There are only infrequent references in the book to such eccentrics as Einstein, et al. Had they been under the care of today's therapeutic state, we wouldn't even have a relativity theory, let alone some of our finer musical and artistic compositions.

Baker's portions on iatrogenisis, particularly MPD (multiple personality disorder) and its cohorts and a whole chapter on depression and its drug "solutions" were well-taken. But I felt he elaborated too much on them making the chapters too long. And while I have little doubt as to the lack of efficacy of psychiatric drugs--particularly, as Baker points out, ironic when they come from the same people decrying "illegal" drugs--I think he was overdramatic. The chapters would have been better served by reemphasis on (1) the profits the drug companies are making from these drugs and (2) too many physicians are ill-equipped to prescribe such things, are reliant, therefore, on advertising from drug manufacturers.

As to the overall rhetoric of the text, the word "allopathic" was used at least twice. That's a term created by or at least most frequently used by homeopaths and other "alternative" medicine practitioners. It is, therefore, of dubiuos value, and jeopardized Baker's credibility. In other portions of the book, therapy is related to "race, ethnicity and class" in ways that I think misuse the figures. In short, it's expressions like those that I expect from young (white, affluent) hyper-radicals who, in their post-modernist fashion, are fond of referring to a monolithic, capitalist medical culture against which they claim to rebel with so-called "alternatives." I expect more from Baker. Granted, I don't disagree with him on some of the class, etc., issues. But he skimmed them with quotes from a few who're critical of the therapeutic industry leaving the reader wondering if the author had thought them through or just shot them in to make an ideological point without true application.

In several chapters, I got the impression that Dr. Baker is a member of the temperace movement. Again, I'm not advocating use of psychiatric drugs, let alone their excess prescription for every mood swing. But I got the "evil drug" impression like I would expect from a fundamentalist preacher or a "treatment" guru. He's so opposed to "addictions" that he discourages them to caffiene and even to chocolate. Let's get real! Indeed, he could have covered weapons in the therapeutic arsenal such as "treatments" of various kinds particularly for alcohol and drug abuse. But maybe he's ideologically alinged with them.

Overall the book had it's good points. But it was cumbersome and, again, frequently went off in directions at best distracting and usually harmful to the message. And, frankly, I hate to say that as I think the therapeutic state needs some credible critics.

Dr. Baker is professor emeritus of psychology at the University of Kentucky. From that vantage point, and 40 years as a psychologist, it became apparent to him that most of what mental health professionals profess to do is pseudoscience. Mind Games describes and debunks some of the major shortcomings and downright nonsense promoted in the name of mental illness. He deftly savages the ridiculous but popular belief in "multiple personalities" and several other so-called ilnesses that he says are "iatrogenic," or caused by the therapist. Baker decribes his obvious displeasure with the medicalizing of everyday problems in living, and especially with their "treatment" with drugs. Not a temperance fanatic at all, he advocates moderation in living and in seeking help. His is a message of self-reliance and skepticism about expert help. Given the great harm done to people by the mental health profession, he recommends a variety of non-professional means of coping and regaining happiness and stability. ... As a prominent skeptic he has written many books debunking nonsense. This is one of his best.

The good news is that Robert Baker agrees with the conclusions ... that psychology is pseudoscience, psychiatry is pseudomedicine, "mental illness" is psychobabble for undisciplined behaviour, and psychotherapy is the same kind of cold reading practised by bartenders and taxi drivers, but without the real experts' ability to recognize that their conclusions are just as likely to be wrong as right. ...
The only difference between psychologists and "psychic" Uri Geller is that, while both earn their living by encouraging the belief that they can read minds, Geller is fully aware that he is a common magician pretending to utilize powers that do not exist, whereas psychotherapists brainwash themselves into believing that they really can see inner truths not apparent to bartenders or taxi drivers. That conceit led one psychiatrist to authenticate alien abductions, on the ground that he would have known if his informants were lying.
Mind Games is a logical, scholarly refutation of the hoax of psychotherapy. Unfortunately, definitive debunking of the psychotherapy hoax by psychiatrists of the eminence of Robert Baker, Thomas Szasz, and the two dozen others named in Baker's dedication, has had little influence on the nonsense peddlers who need it most. Auto-reinforced brainwashing is still as prevalent in pseudomedicine as it is in all of the other security beliefs mindlessly endorsed by the ratings-motivated media. And that is unlikely to change in the foreseeable future: "Forty percent of all Americans will enter psychotherapy at some point in their lives." Barnum was too conservative.

Having read a good number of biographies on Mary Baker Eddy, I found this particular volume to be well-intended but ineffective. About 95% of Nennemann's book has already been covered, repeatedly in some cases and in more detail, by other books; but the little new light he throws on the subject is interesting (particularly Eddy's discomfort with Christian Science promoting itself in proximity to Eastern religions and Spiritualism). The author seems to have genuine respect and affection for his subject, while presenting her in a non-idealized way --something to be appreciated; but the writing lacked style and content. Intending no great disrespect, whereas another reviewer mentioned the book kept him awake, I had exactly the reaction.

This book provided me with a wonderful perspective on Mary Baker Eddy's healing gift and how she established it, against considerable odds, as a system, supported by a church and a publishing house, which remains available for personal study through her book, Science & Health with Key to the Scriptures.

This fairly short biography of Mary Baker Eddy gives a fuller and deeper appreciation of her character than even Robert Peel's three volume work. Nenneman relates the events of her life in a way that throws real light on the way Christian Science itself informed her actions and gradually developed her perceptions. The reader may still want to turn to Peel's work for detailed analysis but this well-documented book is the very best place to start a study of this religious figure. It reminds one of Edmund Morris' Rise of Theodore Roosevelt. Real feeling for the subject pervades every page.