My book, Death from the Skies!, has been out for about two weeks now. It’s doing pretty well, and I’m happy. Reviews are starting to trickle in, and in general they are very positive. I don’t think I’ve seen a negative one yet, except by one goofy antiscience guy who doesn’t seem to understand literary metaphors (read the off-topic weird comments there, too).
I also found out today that a pretty big magazine (with a circulation well over 1 million) will do a review of the book. I’ll write about that when it comes out.
So things are going pretty well. If you want to read the reviews, here are the ones I’ve seen so far. If you have a review I haven’t seen (or forgot about because I’m a bonehead sometimes) please link to it in the comments!
Deathscope (not a review per se, but actually a Yahoo pipe setup that looks for mention of the book. BABlogee Paolo Amaroso put that together for me. Awesome.)
Fellow astronomer and blogger Mike Brotherton
Amazon reviews (one guy gave it three stars, saying "I find it more sleazy journalistic or science-fiction." Hmph)
Taedium Edax Rerum (preview)
Taedium Edax Rerum II (This is the actual review… his complaint made me smile.)
Skepchick Thanks Rebecca!
Astrocast (This is an online video show about astronomy, in the latest you can see my book on Harold Geller’s desk about 2:20 into the video).
The Daily Beast (written by my Hive Overmind co-blogger Melissa Lafsky)
The Awesomer (not a real review, just a plug)
Astro Engine (an unboxing)
Ionian Enchantment (not a review, but an obvious comment)
November 6th, 2008 at 2:15 pm
So……when are you going to be on the Daily show or the Colbert Report????
Pete
November 6th, 2008 at 2:18 pm
Peter asks a valid and very important question.
November 6th, 2008 at 2:21 pm
Does this pretty big magazine happen to be one that may or may not host your blog??
Colbert is a better fit for the content of Death…
November 6th, 2008 at 2:23 pm
I read the book in one sitting. I especially liked the last chapter on the death of the universe. Was a great read!
November 6th, 2008 at 2:25 pm
Glad you like the Deathscope.
November 6th, 2008 at 2:32 pm
You anthropomorphized the universe? Is that legal?
November 6th, 2008 at 2:32 pm
@The Chemist
How about we kidnap Neil Degrasse Tyson next time he’s scheduled to appear on Colbert. Phil can just “happen” to be waiting right outside the studio.
November 6th, 2008 at 2:34 pm
Woops, I didn’t mean @The Chemist there.
November 6th, 2008 at 3:04 pm
I’m glad I got a smile out of you, Phil. Do you have any plans for a third book?
November 6th, 2008 at 3:34 pm
Wow, that commenter in that first web page you linked is weird.
November 6th, 2008 at 3:35 pm
Since it’s getting rave reviews I might have to pick this book up to. Is there lots of pictures in it? LOL
November 6th, 2008 at 3:52 pm
I’m halfway through the last chapter now, and it’s been a wonderful read. Phil has put a lot into this book. I especially liked the chapter on stars and the different elements in fusion reactions, because it explained stellar behaviour very clearly and in a fascinating way.
November 6th, 2008 at 4:00 pm
Of course, I read the one by the “goofy antiscience guy” first…you really need to learn not to link to those
November 6th, 2008 at 4:36 pm
In fact we have already shot a response to a question likely to appear in our December Episode where Dr. Geller is show perusing through your book. That in response to a question about the Sun and when it will consume the Earth.
November 6th, 2008 at 4:48 pm
I just finished last night.I am going to read it again in about a week. 1) to digest what I did understand and 2) to wrap my head around some of the concepts in the book that I am not to up to speed on.
Awsome…
November 6th, 2008 at 6:00 pm
There’s still a print magazine out there with a circulation over one million!?!?
November 6th, 2008 at 6:31 pm
The 3 star Amazon dude doesn’t like SF by the look of it. Thumbs down for that part but he then says “there is no possibility of manmade disaster entertained whatsoever”. Wow, way to miss the point.
Just finished the chapter on GRBs. Going down to the hardware store to see if I can by a few kilometres of lead shielding….
November 6th, 2008 at 6:45 pm
“there is no possibility of manmade disaster entertained whatsoever”
I totally agree with this. It’s the same reason I hated the Poseidon Adventure. I still can’t believe they couldn’t find a way to work a single forest fire into that film.
November 6th, 2008 at 6:53 pm
Poseidon Adventure
I still remember reading the Mad Comic version as a kid… The Poopside Down Adventure. Heh.
November 6th, 2008 at 8:25 pm
Hmm. . . A man-made disaster that would fit into the theme of the book?
Well, one could posit a future war between earth and space colonies. Though it’s really just a variation on the “alien invasion” theme.
November 6th, 2008 at 9:27 pm
I had no idea that Harold Geller did AstroCast! I’ll have to peek in his office next time I wander past and see if the book is still there.
November 7th, 2008 at 5:14 am
I’m slowly working my way through the book.
Not slowly because it’s bad or boring, but due to time contraints, speaking of which, Phil, you’re screwing with the quality of my work, this Monday I stayed up far too late reading your book, which turned me into a zombie the next day at work.
That said, excellent book, easy to get into, the traditional BA mix of humor and facts, with a bit of sarcasm here and there
November 7th, 2008 at 8:24 am
Okay, I’m not writing this to defend the ”goofy antiscience guy”, I’m pretty sure he can do that himself. The behaviour shown on this blog entry, by supposedly rational people, is just so mind-boggling that I can’t keep my mouth shut.
As far as I understand it, an essential asset of sceptics is to critically, rationally look at things and then come to a conclusion. What I ask myself, and you Phil, is this: How can anyone who actually takes a rational, critical look at thedailygrail.com and the posts by the people running the site assume that they, or specifically Greg, are antiscience ? It should be clear to a five-year-old that they’re interested in news from both sides of the fence, be it ‘real science’ or the fringe areas…and that they condemn or embrace neither, but are interested in open-mindedness and dialogue.
Anybody failing to see that lacks essential characteristics of a sceptic. Because either you filter their ‘agenda’ through your preconceived views, or you come to conclusions about it without having examined it. Both entirely unscientific and unworthy of a real sceptic.
Furthermore, do you really lack the sense of humour to appreciate his words about anthropomorphizing the universe for what they were – a tongue-in-cheek comment in regards to your role as sceptic ? Something completely devoid of any offensive spirit ? Or are you so afraid that one of your peers might think you were *actually* anthropomorphizing the universe (golly !), that you had to make it look like he was not getting your literary metaphor ?
And oh, it still eludes me how his post was a review (he stated he hadn’t read your book yet), and uhm, how exactly it was a bad one. You’re a little hard to follow there.
What the hell with referring to the commenters though ? Did you do that to make him seem even less respectable than you attempted with what you called him, or do you actually think we all should start to judge writers and their writings by the comments they get now ? I hope you don’t, this would put you in a pretty bad light considering none of these supposedly rational suckups here had the guts to point out how off the mark you are when it comes to simple tongue-in-cheek humour, or open-mindedly looking at a webpage.
Geez guys, get those sticks out of your backsides, take some acid, some ayahuasca, do some ritual magick or whatever…and when you come back still a sceptic – awesome ! Then we’re gonna have great grounds for a fruitful discussion. But ridiculing and denying everything from your arm chairs that doesn’t fit your narrow reality tunnels, that’s as far from the scientific spirit as you can get.
Have a great weekend.
November 7th, 2008 at 10:12 am
I’m about half way through the book and have found two editing errors so far. Where do you want those sent???
Leander: Acid? What? Are you lost in the 90s? Been there. Done that. Still rational!
GAry 7
November 7th, 2008 at 10:36 am
@Gary
”Acid? What? Are you lost in the 90s?”
Yeah, ignore ”…some ayahuasca, do some ritual magick or WHATEVER” and pick the one that gives you a lukewarm, almost snappy, totally off-topic comeback. Typical, ‘sceptic, rational’ procedure…pick the ‘weakest’ part and attack that one, don’t bother to deal with the rest.
”Done that. Still rational!”
What exactly is your point ? Have you even read what I wrote after the recommendation ?
November 7th, 2008 at 10:39 am
I recently finished it, and loved it!
I have to wonder, though; how certain is it that protons will break down? Isn’t there a chance thay won’t, and thus we’ll have a different End of the Universe senerio?
November 7th, 2008 at 2:50 pm
Leander:
Yes. Unfortunately, there wasn’t enough in your comment to be worth my time,,,
Grand Lunar: Proton decay is highly speculative. The Standard Model says they don’t however, we still have a lot to learn. Let me get back to you in, say, a decade or two,,,
Gary 7
November 7th, 2008 at 3:35 pm
Book signings, anywhere?
November 7th, 2008 at 7:21 pm
Agreed, Leander. It is hilarious that a ‘scientist’ has to stoop to conjuring up a straw man opponent to fulfil some deep-seated need for a wonted mythical dualism between a) science; and b) things dubbed antiscience. I assume only ‘goofy antiscientists’ give reviews which highlight the irony of metaphorical explications in the narratives of ye olde thin-skinned champions of all that is True and reasonable physicalist Cosmoverse as appreciated by ‘proper’ storytellers.
November 8th, 2008 at 4:31 am
I’m geetting way too worked up about this, but yeah, you’re right Legion. It’s annoying as hell. “Oh, let’s just ignore that it wasn’t even a review and that he just made a comment in good spirit that anybody with a rudimentary form of humour should be able to appreciate. Let’s just keep up the division between ‘us and them’. Let’s ignore that they’re about being open-minded and dialogue between different world views, screw that – we need to maintain our identity as rational, sceptical people after all ! Otherwise, what else would protect us from this mysterious, big universe and all these dumb & dangerous people who don’t experience it the way we do ? God (oopsy !) forbid we chill a little.” Man.
November 8th, 2008 at 9:09 am
Phil,
My 18 month old is totally fascinated by your book. He keeps picking it up, taking the cover off, going through it, taking out my bookmark…. And then he babbles after looking through it. Since he’s just learning how to talk, I can’t quite figure out if he likes it or has found an error. I think he likes it because you talk about different ways to make a “really big mess” and that any mess he makes pales in comparison.
November 10th, 2008 at 4:14 pm
The book rocks! Well written, just the right amount of humor and Phil always gives you statistics on how unlikely things are to actually happen so you don’t get too worried from reading it. I’ve only got about halfway through the book before I found issues with the Kindle version. In a couple sections of the book the DRM would fail and cause issues with accessing any other DRM content until I reset the device. Amazon is in the process of correcting the issue so I am anxiously waiting for them to repulbish it so I can finish the book.
November 13th, 2008 at 2:54 am
WAY too late, but here’s mine.
http://somecanadianskeptic.blogspot.com/2008/11/death-from-this-guys-blog.html
November 29th, 2008 at 4:35 pm
Two more: Wired Magazine (!) and Duffbert.
December 20th, 2008 at 4:22 pm
And another: Guys Lit Wire. I like this one a lot.
January 23rd, 2009 at 3:05 am
Sorry for the extreme lateness, but I finally read the book and posted my own meager review at my blog Action Skeptics.
In short, it’s fantastic. You should write lots more books.