And his particular domain is exquisitely narrow ... as further evidenced by the breadth and depth of his ignorance. Sorry to rant, but there's a guy that gets on my nerves.
But his points, at least as he wrote them in the particular book I mentioned aren't invalid or interesting because he's a jerk (his chapter on wanderlust had my head spinning).
"Follow the money" is a guideline that makes sense. I even thought his reasons for -not- dismissing astrology outright were somewhat interesting, although I see in his wikipedia entry that he now 'believes' in astrology.
"Follow the money" is a guideline that makes sense. I even thought his reasons for -not- dismissing astrology outright were somewhat interesting, although I see in his wikipedia entry that he now 'believes' in astrology.