Due to a sudden, unexpected passing in the family a few years ago and another more recently and my subsequent (mental) health issues stemming from that, I was unable to download this book in time to review it before it was archived as I did not visit this site for several years after the bereavements. This means I can't leave an accurate reflection of my feelings towards the book as I am unable to read it now and so I am leaving a message of explanation instead.

I am now back to reading and reviewing full time as once considerable time had passed I have found that books have been helping me significantly in terms of my mindset and mental health - this was after having no interest in anything for quite a number of years after the passings.

Anything requested and approved will be read and a decent quality review written and posted to Amazon (where I am a Hall of Famer & Top Reviewer), Goodreads (where I have several thousand friends and the same amount who follow my reviews) and Waterstones (or Barnes & Noble if the publisher is American based). Thank you for the opportunity and apologies for the inconvenience.

As an avid learner of how to approach misinformation, this book has been a great addition to my professional shelf. I use it in conjunction with others to develop lessons for my students and for teacher workshops.

This was a really interesting book. It was not exactly what I was expecting but I really found the content interesting. So much information had been manipulated and confused and this was a great book to clear up some misinformation. I did some extra reading after and learned a lot.

I expected this book to be about misinformation, like the title says. Instead, it nitpicks how we use the English language. Maybe some sticklers would enjoy it, but it's not for me. DNF.

Thanks, NetGalley, for the ARC I received. This is my honest and voluntary review.

I did not get time to read this book as I am in college. I will look out for the book as I am interested in this topic. Thank you for making the title available.

That was an enjoyable read! The book really was what the blurb described, misconceptions debunked. I actually learned some new things and really enjoyed the author's writing. I can imagine that people say he throws too much of his quirky "OCD-ish" behaviours in, but I found them relatable and funny. After reading the personal stories you also understand why he would write a book like this in the first place. A lot of research has gone into this, and I think it goes in depth enough for a popular science book. People saying it's not detailed enough should go read scientific articles about the topics. The book delivers what it promises.

As a scientist (physicist, specifically), I found myself facepalming repeatedly when faced with cliche after cliche while reading. I was expecting a thorough guide to critical thinking to share with bone-headed bigots I encounter, but instead this book focuses on aging buzzwords and vague debunking of broad ideas. I don't think this book would do much to broaden ignorant minds.

I thought this book would be more infotainment then it ended up being. More dry that fun. but still a decent read

This book was a letdown for me. The chosen topics were fairly boring and the science was juvenile at best. Interesting concept, but the execution fell short.

The book we all need in this age of hysteria and misinformation. Written for everyday people you'll be able to read this in snippets when time allows and still get a lot out of it.

The author takes on pseudo science and misinformation by offering scientific explanations in a conversational way.Each chapter covers a different topic. It’s a well written, easy to u dears tans and engaging book.

**I received an electronic ARC from NetGalley in exchange for a fair and unbiased review of this book.

I'm well aware that after years of being a reviewer and critic that I've become "that guy" at parties. You know, the one who corrects people on common sayings and clickbaity articles? While it can be annoying, the book The Stickler's Guide to Science in the Age of Misinformation makes it kind of fun. Educator R. Phillip Bouchard uses his new book to explore incomplete sayings, false teachings from media news, and gives readers a better idea of how to look at incomplete science concepts. Whether it's concepts like "Superfood" or the concept of trees being "the earth's lungs," Bouchard uses research, facts, and important information to fully explain a concept, explain why it has been shortened down for pop culture science, and works to keep readers staying curious. His writing is easily accessible, so don't worry if Chemistry or Biology wasn't your thing in high school.

The Sticker's Guide to Science in the Age of Misinformation is available November 9th.

I'm sorry, but this book just could not hold my interest. I found very little information that wasn't already known to me. Which is a good thing, I guess, for me. At least it makes me feel somewhat knowledgeable. But just because I didn't find much new, that's not to say someone else might really learn something from it. So I am not going to publish my review, so as to not hurt the author, nor to discourage anyone else from reading it. Thanks for the opportunity.

DNF'd at 35%. I kept trying this book for a bit, reading several pages and rolling my eyes, and then stopping for awhile. I should have paid more attention to the word "Stickler" in the title. The book reads pretty juvenile, but the facts that the author is trying to correct are all pretty arbitrary and uninteresting to believe in. This book is the personification of the "Actually" meme. I'm a lover of science and have a dislike for misinformation myself, but I would not consider someone using "the rainforest are the lungs of the planet" as misinformation or incorrect. It's a metaphor to understand more complicated things. This author seems like they'd be annoying at parties.

“Forests are the lungs of the planet.” “There is no gravity in space.” While most of us feel we understand what these statements mean, Bouchard, aka “the stickler” contends that statements like these are imprecise and misleading. In The Stickler’s Guide, he aims to set us straight and encourage readers to examine statements like this critically. The sections were short and easy to understand but not oversimplified. Bouchard’s tone is witty and entertaining. I learned some things and thoroughly enjoyed this. I will be recommending that high school teachers incorporate sections into class readings.

The Stickler's Guide to Science in the Age of Misinformation by R. Philip Bouchard promises the real science behind hacky headlines, crappy clickbait, and suspect sources. With its eye-catching cover and intriguing title, I couldn’t resist the call - I had to read it.

The book contains 13 chapters, each dissecting one common phrase, such as 'the lungs of the planet' or 'no gravity in space'. Each chapter starts with a personal anecdote, introduces the problematic phrase, and delves into the science behind.

Generally speaking, this book had a great potential to mend its readers' understanding of some common misconceptions. It is not a bad book, but I didn't enjoy it as much as I thought I would. It is somewhat underwhelming for an adult audience. The science presented here is middle/high school level at best. Although the level of science was at a basic level, each chapter tried to cover a wider range of scientific terms and conceptions than was necessary. For most chapters, it would be much better if the author had picked the most relevant concepts and explained them at a deeper level, instead of jumping from one concept to the next in a stream-of-consciousness fashion.

Given the title contains the word 'stickler', there shouldn't be any inconsistencies or inaccuracies in scientific explanations, right? Apparently, I was wrong. Here is an example: "The receptors for these senses send messages to the brain via the nervous system." (page 76). Well, the brain is part of the nervous system. Did the author mean …via nerves? …via the peripheral nervous system? …via nerve fibers? Or how about this statement: "An EKG (electrocardiograph) measures the firing of neurons that control the timing of the heart." (page 196). Umm, no. An EKG measures the cumulative changes in electrical activity of cardiomyocytes during a heartbeat. Simply put, an EKG is a measure of heart muscle activity and not neural activity.

I also wonder why the author picked these 13 topics. Some seemed a bit trivial, and the nitpicky scientific explanations made me roll my eyes instead of feeling illuminated. Honestly, I can think of many other phrases that are extremely inaccurate and could be included in this book, such as "we use 10% of our brains" - a favorite of the entertainment industry.

I expected this book to be more of a source on how to determine whether a statement is misleading. I also expected its science to be more focused and less superficial. It didn't really work for me, but it might work better for a younger audience or for adults with no science backgrounds.

First of all, thanks to #NetGalley and @timberpress for providing me a free e-copy of this book in return for an honest review.

We live in the age of misinformation and unfortunately people relentlessly spread this misinformation, and while people question stuff, it's often not driven from critical thinking but from the urge to be against - without any ounce of thought and compassion. Media helps here, where sensation and clicks and comments are above neutrality and some topics get completely wrong connotations. This book deals with this - how some ingrained popular scientific ideas are, well, not wrong, but actually not quite right.

So the author explains the proper science behind theses like "there is no gravity in space", "people only have five senses", the ever popular "epidemics and pandemics" and one that makes me eye-roll every time I run into it - "superfoods and toxins". The book covers 13 of topics like this, each backed up by science behind it and explained what is off about them and what's the real truth.

The thing is, the huge chunk of this book is what you learn in school so it's a great book to pick up if you wanna refresh your knowledge. But that being said, it reads too much like a school book at times. I expected a more comedic or whimsy approach based on the cover and title. I liked the inclusion of the illustrations, which were simple enough to be easily understood and fit with the text nicely.

As a physicist, I found physics related chapters the most interesting. But since I've been into science for the most of my life, I've already understood most of the concepts from this book so didn't acquire much new information. People who are not that vexed in science would benefit from this book as it's a quick and comprehensive summary of the most popular scientific topics in the media.

The book is out Nov 9, 2021.

This title is going to the be new favorite book for everyone in your life who says "Well, actually..."

Bouchard takes a deep dive into the phrases we hear tossed around the scientific community, including the five senses, the Amazon rainforest acting as the lungs of the world, and the idea that there is no gravity in space. With easy to understand language and helpful graphics, THE STICKLER'S GUIDE TO SCIENCE IN THE AGE OF MISINFORMATION is a fun size candy bar for the science curious.

A deep dive on the truth behind many terms or metaphors that are commonly used by the media as a shorthand for various scientific concepts. As stated in the title, it really is a book best suited for sticklers or pedantic types. The author takes issue with much of the popular vocabulary used by non-scientists, but it's hard to discern any other motivation than just being technically correct. There were no real eye-opening "ah-ha" moments for why people shouldn't continue to say things like, "The rainforests are the lungs of the planet" or "DNA is the blueprint of life." In an age where misinformation on some subjects can literally cost lives, this book's nitpicking at semantics just seems a bit of a luxury.

I love this book. R. Philip Bouchard takes inaccurate or incomplete expressions and, like a stickler, proceeds to show what’s wrong with them. But he doesn’t do this in a pedantic way. He explains in detail and in a conversational tone what actually happens and shows why the expression is wrong, inaccurate or incomplete. All the science is very well-explained in a non-technical manner. He writes with a good sense of humor and adds in personal anecdotes, giving the book a unique tone that should be interesting to readers with or without a science background. Bouchard creates a great relationship with the reader and seems to be the type of author I’d love to meet over coffee. Also adding to the messaging are some very good illustrations and charts. This book is a pleasure to read, and I recommend it for anyone interested in science. Thank you to Netgalley and Timber Press for the advance reader copy.