My reaction to reading this book in 1994.

Another good collection of Martin Gardner’s essays on pseudoscience whose only fault is that the essays (first published in magazines) are too short. My particular favorites are the essays on Freud and his wacky, nose-obsessed Dr. Fliess who influenced psychotherapy, Shirley McLaine's solipsism, perpetual motion devices, Ray Palmer (Gardner characterizes this key player in the UFO field as a mischievous trickster), and L. Ron Hubbard. He concludes the later figure was not only a charlatan but insane. ( )

One of Gardner's better works, this deals with a wide variety of pseudoscientific, pseudohistorical ideas that have become mainstream in American culture. All the chapters have appeared in print before, being taken from his columns in Skeptical Inquirer, as well as some entries from other places, such as Free Inquiry and Nature. He updated a number of them for the book, and included some of the letter exchanges that occurred after the articles appeared, which makes them more complete, as he is able to answer his critics, correct some things he was mistaken about, and in general keep the reader up to date with things that happened in between. Mostly solid, but there are a couple of nit-picking points (well, one not so nit-picking, because it was a glaring error). Thomas Jefferson did not accept the theory of evolution; Jefferson died about the time Darwin was born, and evolutionary theory at that time was, at best, a mish-mash of natural theology, inheritance of acquired characteristics, and philosophical musings on the essence of life. The Theory of Evolution lacked any solid scientific grounding, and Jefferson was possibly unaware of it, and certainly would have been skeptical about the ideas of evolution, as were most intelligent thinkers of the time. This was the glaring error, and I suspect Gardner knew better, but wasn't thinking for some reason when he wrote that. In spite of the otherwise solid status of the book, I consider this particular error to be right up there with the current books of David Barton that claim Thomas Paine advocated teaching creationism in schools - no matter which side you're on, you should avoid adopting people for your cause who had no clue your cause existed, because they died 50 years before it became an issue. Since mistakes of this stature weren't common, I did knock him down a star, but not more. The other nitpicky things mostly revolve around Gardner's soft spot for religion (he himself was a believer, though not fundamentally so). Because of this, he makes a common mistake, confusing scientists and science. The fact that there are religious scientists does not necessarily make science and religion compatible; it might mean that people can hold two competing thoughts at the same time without realizing they aren't compatible (which research has indicated is the case). If you want to make the case that science and religion are compatible, you have to come up with something a bit better than citing what might simply be a vagary of the human mind. Otherwise, highly recommended for its readability and sound thinking. ( )

This book is a collection of the author’s columns written for both Skeptical Inquirer and several other publications. Though published nearly 20 years ago, many of the topics Gardner discusses are still highly relevant in current times. His essays range over subjects including televangelism to UFOlogy. I found his discussion on the widespread fraud perpetuated by famous psychics and the persistent gullibility of paranormal researchers to be particularly informative. Though not specifically just about the New Age, his insightful commentary on spiritual con artists of all stripes would be educational for anyone interested in the ease with which human belief can be manipulated. ( )