QUOTE(Detective @ Mon 14th November 2011, 1:29pm)
Sorry, that won't wash. It's a self-published book (at least I can't see any publisher's name). Thus by definition it's not a reliable source.
You utter fool.......it doesn't matter if it's "reliable" or not. In the real world, the
"reliability" of a source means shit. If people buy this book, it will become "notable".
Popularity wins, "accuracy" is usually unimportant.
Millions of Bibles are sold every year. I don't see anyone effectively challenging it for
its "reliability". Plenty has been written
about that before.
To no avail. Same for all the quack diets, quack medical books, UFO books, conspiracy books etc.This post has been edited by EricBarbour: Tue 15th November 2011, 2:26am