Title: Hack writing covered up as a reference work
Product review: I am unsure as to who gets books like this published. These 101 "myths" are "debunked" using hack writing, non-facts, theorization, scare tactics and shock value. This seems to be the process that the authors went through:1) A fact ("Lucy In The Sky" was based on a Julian drawing) is taken2) That fact is then taken and theorized about("Everyone's seen the drawing but are they lying?")3) The fact is then skewed and the supposed pretentions of the group are used to "debunk" something that's not a myth ("Sure, they all said it was a drawing, but *come on!* That doesn't make sense- it had to be something more because I think so.")Sure some of it makes sense, and could be accepted as good myth-debunking, but the rest is National Enquirer B.S. Save the debunking to Jan Harold Brunvand and the Mythbusters.-The Unknown Reviewer
Would you say this review depicts the product in a flattering or unflattering light?
