Is it really that cute? For example, I get the WSJ delivered daily because I value it's top-notch reporting and journalism. But, I usually skip its editorial pages: their editorials are written by people with strong ideologies and lots of rhetoric - things not very interesting to me. Similarly, FT is probably a top-notch news paper, but should I consider their editorial staff's opinions any more than the WSJ's editorial writers'?

I guess I have a bias against editorialists and a bias toward scientists, researchers, historians.

Furthermore, I am more surprised that more editorialists haven't slammed the book. I mean, given the book's subject and conclusions, I would have expected an avalanche of criticism, by now.