[mc5cents]

You mean besides her multiple instances of misleading and often downright false propaganda about evolutionary biology in chapters 8-10,

Oh, so you at least read the chapter titles. Did you actually read the book? Did you also look into any of the 65 footnotes sited in those chapters 8-10?

[bornacatholic]

One might think, given the title of the thread, that a LITTLE caution would be exercised by her critics, but no.

Why read? Denounce and label. First the verdict then the trial :)

[Ichneumon]

[You mean besides her multiple instances of misleading and often downright false propaganda about evolutionary biology in chapters 8-10,]

Oh, so you at least read the chapter titles.

I've read the book, Skippy. The word "squirrels" appears in the first line of page 230. Happy now, or are you going to issue any more unfounded implied slurs based on your wild and false presumptions?

Did you actually read the book?

Yes, which is why I'm commenting on it. Sheesh, did the average IQ around here suddenly drop in the past week or something?

Did you also look into any of the 65 footnotes sited in those chapters 8-10?

Yes and I've acquired copies of most of the cited references, and I'll be heading to the downtown library to get the remaining few in the next couple of days. It's the final task I need to take care of before I wrap up my critique.

By the way, Coulter grossly misrepresents the contents of many of her citations, and I'll be documenting that as well. Deal with it.

Would you like to be pinged to my results, or would you rather remain in the dark as to how badly she has violated the trust of her fans? If the latter, check my tagline.

Also, if anyone else wants to be pinged to it, send me a Freepmail and let me know.