The Stickler’s Guide to Science in the Age of Misinformation: The Real Science Behind Hacky Headlines, Crappy Clickbait, and Suspect Sources

by R. Philip Bouchard

Today we have more scientific information at our fingertips than ever before--and more disinformation too. Online, on television, and in print, science is often communicated through shorthand analogies and phrases that obscure or omit important facts. “Superfoods,” “right- and left-brained” people, and “global warming” may be snappy and ear-catching but are they backed by scientific facts? Lifelong educator R. Philip Bouchard is a stickler for this kind of thing, and he is well-prepared to set the record straight.

The Stickler’s Guide to Science in the Age of Misinformation unpacks the many misuses of terms we see used every day, revealing how these popular concepts fall short of real science. Find out why trees do not store carbon dioxide; a day is not actually 24 hours; DNA cannot provide a "blueprint" for a human being; and an absence of gravity is not the reason that astronauts float in space. Bouchard makes hard science go down easy, satisfying curiosity and sparking further inquiry that will keep you from getting fooled. 

Genres: Science, Nonfiction, Biology, Popular Science

280 pages, Paperback

Published November 23, 2021

Reviews

[Eser · Rating 2 out of 5]

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 basic, each chapter tried to cover a wider range of scientific terms and concepts 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.

-ARC provided by Netgalley and Timber Press in exchange for an honest review-

[Andrew · Rating 4 out of 5]

Okay, I must confess to being slightly disappointed. Based on the title (and especially the subtitle), I was expecting to read about topics like vaccine and climate change denial and the science that refute such claims. And while the book does discuss climate change and epidemics/pandemics in a more general sense, it really doesn't really address the issues from the headlines that I was hoping it would.

That said, this is a really good overview of the various topics it does discuss, with explanations that should be accessible to the average reader, even if they don't have a deep background in science. I even learned a few new things, especially in the areas about biology/life sciences. It certainly does point out the ways in which we and the media tend to use verbal shortcuts when talking about science, and how this can lead to deep misunderstandings of the actual science. It serves as a reminder that we should be careful not to assume we understand something just because it can be described with a headline worthy statement.

So, there is good information in here for those who want to expand their understanding beyond the catch phases, to understand what science really tells us about a range of topics, from climate change, to evolution, to radiation, and nutrition and genetics. Each chapter covers a different topic, and starts and ends with personal stories or observations from the author (which I found mildly annoying myself, but which might be considered charming by others). Because each chapter is independent of the others, you don't need to read this book straight through from beginning to end, but can pick it up and read it in short bursts, or you can skip to the topics that are of most interest. But if you read the whole thing, there's a good chance that you will learn something you didn't know before.

[Max · Rating 4 out of 5]

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.

Thank you to NetGalley and the publisher for an ARC to read. Opinions are my honest thoughts.

[Andrea · Rating 5 out of 5]

From “killing germs” to the nature of energy, Bouchard covers science topics that affect our daily lives and conversations, pointing out the inconsistencies and illogic in many of our uses of science terms. Each chapter is fairly short and very readable but also clear and careful. Bouchard admits to being a very “ordered” person who dislikes sloppy analogies and imprecision in word use. While the topics he chooses, including epidemics/pandemics, the human senses, the 24 hour day, may seem like familiar subjects we all “understand” well, the author cheerfully points out our misconceptions and inaccurate thinking while never condescending. Readable, entertaining and informative.

[Madis Must(s) · Rating 4 out of 5]

Suurepärane sissevaade tähenärija ja peaaegu obsessiiv-kompulsiivse häirega teadushuvilise mehe ellu, kuigi see ei olnud raamatu mõte. Kuidas uut toitu valmistama asudes tutvub ta esmalt kolme eri retseptiga samast asjast ja püüab aru saada, mis on selle roa essentsiaalsed komponendid ning paneb neist kokku enda retsepti. Või kuidas sööb taldrikul olevat toitu kindlas suunas sektorite kaupa. Või kuidas orgunnib kapis olevaid riideid nii, et ta kannaks kõiki võrdselt.

Neid seiku kirjeldab teadushuviline mees ainult tausta loomiseks, et lugeja saaks aru, miks häirivad meest ajakirjandusest leitavad pealiskaudsed populaarteaduslikud väljendid nagu "DNA is the blueprint of life", "superfood", "the lungs of the planet". Autor lihtsalt tahab, et kõik oleks täpne!

Kui mees kohtab mõnda sellist väljendit, saab ta triggerdatud ning sukeldub reaalteaduste alustesse ja selgitab, kuidas oleks korrektsem öelda. Üldiselt populaarteaduslik ja kena, räägib üle mingeid keskkooli reaalteaduste aluseid ja valideerib nohik olemist. On inimesi, kellele meeldiks see raamat. Mind väga jalust ei rabanud, olen pealiskaudne ja ei viitsinud hetkel süveneda neisse nii-öelda debunkimistesse, mis kõik võib-olla ei olnud säärast kriitikat välja teeninud.

[GONZA · Rating 3 out of 5]

The author chooses some very famous sayings ("tropical forest, lung of the earth", or "there is no gravity in space") and/or topics that are often in the news (right now the term is viruses/pandemics, for example) and with very simple words and clear examples, he explains what is right and what is wrong in what the non-scientists among us tend to think they know or have understood.
I liked the book, but I thought it was a debunking of fake news, with a lot of "names and surnames" of some fake sites that should have been closed long ago. So inform yourself well before buying this book because you may have in your hands, something different from what you expected.

L'autore sceglie alcuni modi di dire molto famosi ("foresta tropicale polmone della terra", oppure "non c'é gravitá nello spazio") e/o argomenti che ricorrono spesso agli onori delle cronache (in questo momento il termine é virus/pandemie, per esempio) e con parole molto semplici ed esempi chiari, spiega cosa c'é di giusto e cosa di sbagliato in quello che, tendenzialmente, i non scienziati tra di noi pensano di sapere o di aver capito.
Il libro mi é piaciuto, ma credevo fosse un debunking di fake news, con tanto di "nomi e cognomi" di alcuni siti farsa che dovrebbero essere giá stati chiusi da tempo. Quindi informatevi bene prima di comprarlo perché potreste avere anche voi tra le mani, qualcosa di diverso da quello che vi aspettavate.

I received from the Publisher a complimentary digital advanced review copy of the book in exchange for a honest review.

[Kyle Oliveria · Rating 1 out of 5]

Book was very basic at the level of science information within it. The author tried to include too many attempts at personal connections with the topics, but oddly they were all focusing on his strange OCD habits, not sure why. Also I bought a physical copy, and half of the book was missing it jumped from page 95 to 165, then the rest of the book was out of order and there were some pages that just weren't there. Definitely look somewhere else if you want a science book.

[Vikas Kalra · Rating 3 out of 5]

This book takes complicated science topics – and as the title suggests, usually simplified, misconstrued, politicized, or poorly explained – and distills them to core concepts for both those with science backgrounds and those without. The discussions are provided in clear and approachable language sprinkled with humor and structured with logic and foundational principles. My 8-year-old was able to discern some of the key points after we discussed some topics from the book. For me – being formally trained in engineering and biology – it was a great review of a vast amount of scientific concepts and the ensuing discussions and research that impact our everyday lives. For those without formal STEM training, I think this book is a required reference, a must to decipher all of the scientific hyperboles and simplification we are subjected to everyday in conversation and the media.

[(a)lyss(a) · Rating 3 out of 5]

I received a copy of this book through the Amazon Vine program in exchange for an honest review.

This book is broken down into different chapters, each dissecting a specific idea or term including killing of germs, lungs of the Earth, and more.

I was expecting a guide on how to evaluate different statements and sources to determine truth. This book really more focuses on how different concepts are talked about than what makes them valid. There are helpful infographics and facts throughout the book for each area.

Overall it feels like a very pop-science approach to common concepts. While you may learn something new, it's likely the people interested in this book already know a lot of the things included.

[Lilac · Rating 3 out of 5]

I think it’s probably good at what it’s trying to do but I’m just not interested.

I was hoping this would be about how to approach public science claims about climate chaos, vaccines, etc. how to think critically and evaluate what might not be getting said.

Instead it’s like internet meme posts about when to use their vs. they’re or the Oxford comma. It really is mostly for sticklers rather than, say, skeptics. Just not for me

[Roy Van Den Brande · Rating 4 out of 5]

It's a good book for teenagers, but most of the chapters are just a summary of high school science class. Gravity, climate change, diseases, dna,... I gave it 4 stars because I felt the other reviews sometimes were too harsh. For me personal it would be 3 stars, but this book really is a 4-star book for younger readers.

[Adagiobear · Rating 4 out of 5]

Bouchard is a stickler for scientific accuracy and he writes with clarity and humour about various scientific concepts that are often used incorrectly in pop culture and the media. This is a fun, easy read and one is bound to learn a thing or two along the way.

[Lo · Rating 4 out of 5]

A different perspective on different issues. I like the authors quirkiness and humour.

[Cary · Rating 5 out of 5]

I understand the frustration with this book, but I enjoyed it and learned several new things and pieced together things I hadn't quite got a handle on.

[Teri · Rating 3 out of 5]

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.