This Is Not a Weasel : A Close Look at Nature's Most Confusing Terms

by Philip B. Mortenson

Book by Mortenson, Philip

Genres: Nonfiction, Science

Library Binding

First published October 16, 2003

Reviews

[Tyler · Rating 3 out of 5]

I'm really not sure who this book is for, it bounces between very common language/popular science (such as explaining taxonomical hierarchies at the beginning, something every biologist knows) to using anatomical terms the average person is unlikely to know. At this point in time, it's certainly out of date, though it still serves as a likely quicker reference guide for differentiation than even the internet could provide.

[Rebecca · Rating 3 out of 5]

Great reference book or if you're someone who likes a dose of random information every day. It would be better with illustrations, hence 3 stars, otherwise I'd give it 4.

[dejah_thoris · Rating 3 out of 5]

As a cataloger, I LOVED the first chapter on scientific taxonomy and its history. The rest of the book is subdivided by animal type (plants being the second chapter) and includes both the somewhat mundane and the extraordinary examples of confusing animal appellations. Scientific names for all levels of classification are used, which may alienate the layperson compelled to pronounce them properly, but I love long new words, so no loss there. I must, however, admit that although the physical descriptions of each animal and the differences between those being compared are thorough, this book would GREATLY benefit from the addition of illustrations, especially for those less commonly encountered.

[Katharine Holden · Rating 2 out of 5]

Interesting, but the dearth of pictures is a hindrance to understanding.

[Angie · Rating 1 out of 5]

It seemed so interesting...but I found it way too bogged down with scientific jargon that I couldn't get past the first few sections. Bummer.

[Megan · Rating 3 out of 5]

Interesting facts, helpful book, but can get too detailed for the casual reader.

[Jordan Miller · Rating 3 out of 5]

Good for what it is, but it would be so much better with pictures comparing the animals.

[Philip Mortenson]

In answer to the various comments about the lack of illustrations in the book, I have to agree that it's disservice to both the text and the reader. As the author of the book I included quite a number of illustrations when I submitted the ms, all of which I was assured in writing where copyright free. As the ms made its way through the editing process it was eventually discovered that my illustration source could not supply satisfactory evidence of the copyright status to the publisher's legal department. Because this came up rather late in the publishing process---the illustrations had already been included in the proofs---there was no time in which to acquire and vet new ones. Hence the book went to publication sans the illustrations everyone had looked forward to. (less)