Anson are to continue to maintain that this is a true story, they are obligated to clarify the discrepancies mentioned. If they can do so, fine and dandy. If not, then the public should be informed loudly and clearly that this book and any fur- ther representation of it in the media should be regarded as entertainment only. As it stands, the cover of the book would appear to constitute false advertising and should be handled in the same way as false advertising is handled in analo- gous cases. • The World Almanac Book of the Strange. By the Editors of the World Almanac. New American Library, New York, 1977. 482 pp., paperback, $2.50. Reviewed by James Randi Several members of the Committee for the Scientific Investigation of Claims of the Paranormal were contacted months before this book went to press. The results of those consultations are obvious, though we understood from the begin- ning that many of our comments and corrections would not be incorporated, simply because of a lack of time to rewrite certain sections; books just do not get into print if every last-minute revision and correction is implemented. Where the Committee was able to serve the editors, accounts of apparent miracles are well tempered—in other places, the usual misinformation is repeated. The cover advertises this very informative and intriguing volume with: "The world is full of amazing things: strange people, creatures, places, powers, prac- tices, miracles, facts, legends, frauds, objects, customs, religions, and every other phenomenon that anyone has ever wondered about." Inside, we come upon many genuine and fascinating items such as "killer bees," black holes, Druids, Tiahuanaco, and Oak Island. Then we must suffer through remote viewing, Peter Hurkos, the "Philip Phenomenon," and other similar codswollop. But it is all quite well done, despite the lack of a dissenting view on, for example, the Targ/Puthoff "Mind Reach" experiments that have since proved rather less than well designed and implemented. Such data were simply not available to the edi- tors at the time, and in talks with George E. Delury, editor of The World Al- manac, I have been assured that future editions, when revised, will include the CSICP's modifications. The Geller myth is particularly well handled; in fact, the editors consulted the CSICP on this particular case just after the group was formed. The resulting account shows what can be done to create an intelligent and adequate coverage of a controversial and difficult subject, though Geller is hardly the cult-figure that he once was, now that the truth is out. The work of Kammann and Marks, in New Zealand, and Martin Gardner, Ray Hyman, and others of the Committee is quoted and referred to many times, and the truth about Geller and the 102 THE SKEPTICAL INQUIRER "research" conducted on his tricks becomes obvious. Yet the very real fascina- tion of the subject and the strange people surrounding him comes through strong- ly. A myth need not be pampered to be interesting as story material. Needless to say, there are scores of places where the CSICP would have liked to have been involved. Valuable insights and numerous negations would have been available to the editors on such subjects as Kirlian photography, Scien- tology, dermal vision, and the secret life of plants, to name but a few. And Com- mitteeman Philip Klass has a great deal to add to the editors' knowledge of the UFO matter! It is well to be thankful for small blessings. Our Committee is referred to in this book in error as the "Para Committee" and as the "Committee to Investi- gate Claims of Paranormal and Other Phenomena," since they first heard of us while we were thrashing about for a proper and descriptive name. Also, we are listed under the section titled, "Strange Groups." But we are listed, and the editors have shown their good intentions and their willingness to present the facts by consulting us where possible. We trust that the CSICP will play a larger role in subsequent editions of this book, in spite of Mr. Delury's report that one customer demanded his money back because the book was "negative." Delury countered this by sending the man a copy of a letter from another reader who ap- preciated the "balanced" approach. The book is quite a grabber. But it must be taken "with a grain of salt." I recommend a grain about as big as a basketball. Reviewed by Kendrick Frazier The preparation of a survey of the entire field of strange phenomena and strange things (not just the paranormal) must have seemed a formidable task for the editors of this compendium. Especially since they, in contrast to so many others before them, set up the laudable goal of attempting valiantly to present probable explanations of the mysteries, when possible, and otherwise to try to sort fact from fiction and sense from nonsense. The rarity of such attempts in itself makes this effort almost cause for exaltation. Considering the scope of the presentation (from alpha rhythms, aspirin, and astrology to Velikovsky, voodoo, and the Zeti Reticuli controversy) and the quantity of material they had to assimilate and try to put into perspective, the editors have to be given generally good marks. There's a refreshing lack of ideological bias and most everywhere a tone of honest searching for the truth of the matter, even when that may seem less mysterious than many book buyers might wish to know. They don't always succeed, but at least you get the feeling their hearts and minds are in the right place. The book's quest for distinctions is one quality nearly all should appreciate. Different hypothesized phenomena have different levels of scientific credibility, and too often those distinctions are not made. Balance is sought here not just by mechanically contrasting claim and counterclaim, which too often is as far as some efforts at "objectivity" go. When a harsh judgment is clearly called for by Spring/Summer 1978 103 the evidence, the editors have, at least in some notable cases, made it. They have had the courage to place the Bermuda Triangle, for instance, in a small section at the end reserved for "hoaxes and forgeries," right there with the Piltdown man. The detective work and analyses by Larry Kusche clearly justify that categoriza- tion, and the editors have had the good sense to recognize that. Similarly, a twelve-page section on astrology distinguishes between popular and serious as- trology, mentions various scientific studies of astrology, and concludes forth- rightly, "In spite of these studies, there is no scientific evidence that astrology has any validity." The detailed section on Uri Geller is, as James Randi noted, well informed and intelligently handled, and devastating to Geller in its conclusions, due in no small measure to the factual evidence about Geller's methods made available by Randi himself. In contrast, I found the section about Immanuel Velikovsky disappointingly naive and incomplete. Two paragraphs are devoted to critics' views, but no men- tion is made of the symposium on Velikovsky at the American Association for the Advancement of Science annual meeting in San Francisco in 1974, which presented all the facts necessary to discount his arguments for good. Unfor- tunately, the book emanating from that symposium, Scientists Confront Velikov- sky (Cornell University Press, 1977) became available only late last fall, after the Book of the Strange was in press. But still a reference to Carl Sagan's ten dif- ferent lines of evidence against Velikovsky's arguments (rather than just a critical comment by Sagan) could have been obtained and included. The book trots out the old, distorted arguments about Velikovsky's predictions later being "verified" by science, but the misinformation surrounding these supposed verifi- cations is notorious. That Venus would prove hot was predicted by some scien- tists long before Velikovsky did so, and for the right reasons. The Apollo land- ings did not confirm that the moon's surface had been molten only a few millen- nia ago, as Velikovsky had predicted. They revealed that it had been molten some four billion years ago, an entirely different matter and irrelevant to Velikovsky's arguments of recent catastrophism. The section leaves the mistaken impression that the scientific verdict on Velikovsky is still out, a misstatement exposed in all its baldness by Anthony Aveni's recent discussion in Science (January 20, 1978) concluding: "Velikovsky is flatly and totally disproven. The final nail has been driven. It is to be hoped that we can now move on to more exciting things." Other sections probably have some of these same kinds of deficiencies. The section on parapsychology is perhaps a little over-generous to proponents of that field. The section about UFOs, detailed as it is, seems weak and in need of more scientific input. But it does make reference to some of Phil Klass's explanations of sightings and it does list Klass's ten UFOlogical Principles, cautionary points so useful that I once went to considerable effort to compile them onto a single page (they're scattered throughout Klass's book UFOs Explained) so I could make copies and distribute them to friends. The positive value of the book's approach generally exceeds its understand- able weaknesses. It has a reasonable, one might even say hard-hitting, preface signed by World Almanac Editor George E. Delury. He makes such worthy 104 THE SKEPTICAL INQUIRER points as, "Key-bending psychics, UFOs, lost continents, and ancient astronauts are mere curiosities compared to the genuine miracles of nature," and "The human capacity for credulity and self-delusion is itself one of the most mysterious things about Homo sapiens," and (after listing a dozen or so occult subjects) "Ninety-eight percent of this stuff is balderdash." He explains sympathetically why scientists often choose not to waste time and reputation in some of these areas.