A H

Written in clear, straight-forward, easily readable prose- but it reads more like a collection of opinions than a book of well-evidenced, well-argued rebuttals. For a book that wants to get the truth across, it cites almost no evidence for its claims. I'm sure the author has access the evidence/could find it if he chose to. It doesn't need to be full academic citation - it could just be a hat-tip to sources. The shaky arguments and the typos (e.g., 'Columbia' instead of 'Colombia', 'breech' instead of 'breach') suggest it could've benefitted from stronger editing. Best of luck for part 2