What do we do with books in which the author makes some compelling arguments in early chapters, then makes some pseudoscientific claims later? I'm talking claims that have been discredited for decades.
>"What do we do with books in which the author makes some compelling arguments in early chapters, then makes some pseudoscientific claims later? I'm talking claims that have been discredited for decades."
If it's science, then judge each claim based on the evidence, whether or not they seem compelling; whether or not they contradict established scientific dogma.
