Do you have a question? Post it now! No Registration Necessary.  Now with pictures!

I am not surprised by the sloppiness of Mr. Slade's review. Having read
a handful of his reviews of books that I have personally read carefully,
I have concluded on the basis of factual reasons that:

1. Mr. Slade tends to shoot from the hip and makes comments on books
that he either has not read carefully enough or has not understood. In
at least two cases, his restatements of the authors' statements that he
reviewed were totally misinterpreted by him to mean the exact opposite
of what these authors' statements had been.
Such sloppy restatements on his part suggest that he merely skims
through books he plans to review, latches onto a sentence here and there
out of context, and pronounces judgment.
This is like the case of the newspaper who reported on a Monday morning
about the local pastor's sermon the day before that "There is no God,
said the Pastor", when in fact the pastor has said "The devil wants you
to think that there is no God". Huge difference.

2. Mr. Slade habitually mixes editorializing (his personal opinions and
many biases) with facts in a manner intended to make the reader think
that Mr. Slader's editorial opinions are facts, too. This is in the best
tradition of Yellow Journalism.

As a result, I now consider Mr. Slader's reviews as mere pompous blogs
having no value.

Site Timeline