error Books

A good quick read with helpful illustrations. The book consists of fundamental suggestions on how to improve specific shots when problems arise. I skimmed back over this short book during my busride to our hometown golf course...armed with this knowledge, my golf clubs and my seasonal bus-pass I was confident that at the end of the day my score would put me in the drivers seat "so to speak" in our foursome. Sure enough it did---I ended up over the last ten holes shooting one over par, having the longest drive in our group and also closest to the pin. It mainly talks about squaring the clubface and slices and your backswing. Do not let the date of original publication concern you.

This book replaces all the videos, all the little red and green books, all the magazines... Golf has simple building blocks that golfers must attend to on a continuous basis... Review this book before bedtime & wakeup to your best round of the year... From 96 to 94 to 84 in my first three rounds of the year. 84 tied my best round ever... This book's copyright date should not dissuade... Ageless and priceless... Your visualization skills are truly exercised... Scan the pages before every round and forget about your pregame stretch...

Edward Norman successfully helps the reader understand how and why the Anglican Church (and, by extension, the Anglican Communion) arrived at the lamentable condition in which it finds itself today. A gripping read for those who are interested in this sort of thing. After reading Anglican Difficulties with care, one can only conclude that the whole enterprise has since its 16th century inception been in grave danger of falling apart due to the inconsistencies inherent in the circumstances of its creation and issues of authority it has never addressed. As a direct result, Anglicanism finds itself in a life and death struggle to convincingly sustain the image of being an authentic Church at all, as distinct from a deliberately confected ecclesiastical pastiche. Anyone with any experience of the Church can quite clearly see the truth of what Canon Norman writes, alas. To escape these difficulties will require a depth of spirit and brilliance of intellect that even the present Archbishop of Canterbury might find beyond his capabilities.

Edward Norman, prior to writing this book on 'Anglican Difficulties', composed a book entitled 'An Anglican Catechism'. That title was a bit unusual, given that the Book of Common Prayer in various national forms sometimes contains a question-and-answer catechism of sorts, but this was not any of those. It was a more theological development of the ideas that come out of the question 'what should an Anglican believe?' This book on difficulties addresses key questions of contention - the Anglican way is often held up as a the 'via media', the middle way, but it just as often succeeds in satisfying no one with this approach.

The Anglican Communion at the moment is beset with difficulties, which include issues of proper and appropriate authority, interpretation of scripture and tradition, use of cultural context, and the very meaning of Anglicanism itself. These difficulties often default back to the issue of authority - not simply an issue of who has the actual power, but also on the legitimate exercise of that power, and what moral and ethical authority one can legitimately exercise and under what circumstances.

Norman was considered part of the 'new Right' of the Church of England (the 'home church' of the Anglican Communion). I use the term 'was', because he has since left the Church of England to become a Roman Catholic. Despite serving most of his career as a Church of England cleric in reasonably high office, he nonetheless maintained that his views were Catholic (Norman is not unique in this - there is the common term Anglo-Catholic to describe a certain element in the Anglican world). Many interpreted this book as a 'ring and run' - some mainstream commentators described it as a 'scathing attack' on the Church of England, and in many regards they would be correct.

Norman has rarely been one to pull punches, but also is extraordinarily precise in his verbal constructions, both in speaking and in writing. One might not agree with his ideas or his conclusions, but there is a quality of intelligence here. Norman states near the end of his text a comparison of the Anglican world and the Roman Catholic world (this was before his announcement of his leaving the Church of England for Rome). 'The future of the Church seems to be entrusted to the southern hemisphere, and its orthodoxy of teaching is guaranteed for so long as Rome itself retains centralised authority. The Anglican Communion, in contrast, is nothing more than a periodic conference of once like-minded individual Churches who have little in common now, but a colonial past.'

Norman's principal problem with Anglicanism is not just the ambiguities of authority, but its incorporation of liberal ideas; this becomes clear in the final pages of his book. Throw into this liturgical changes (the Church of England shifted from adherence to the 1662 Book of Common Prayer to the new Common Worship texts) and sexuality issues (which are mentioned again and again in this text, and even has a chapter devoted to it), and the stage is set for Norman's normally biting style to become a bit of an overbite.

This is an important book to read in many respects, and one destined for Anglicans (both in and out of the official Anglican Communion) to either love or to hate.

I teach the phlebotomy class at a vocational school and this is excellent material that contains the current guidelines for working in a hospital setting.

This is a great text to have in the laboratory. It not only can serve as a reference but also as a training tool. The review questions at the end of each chapter help serve as a competency check in our lab. I highly recommend this book!

I started reading a friend's copy of this book and found it very hard to put down. I intend to add it to my personal collection as well as purchase copies for my children to read.

A great book about history, religion, sports, and anything you could possibly imagine. My favorite book.

This is a remarkable work by an eminent Byzantinist who has specialized in the anti-Latin polemical literature which was to have a profound effect in poisoning relations between medieval Latins and Byzantine Greeks and thereby impeding the union of the Churches.Such religious literature emanating largely from monastic circles and enumerating the abhorrent "errors" of the Latins proved to be far more influential in demonizing them than the works of professional theologians dealing with major dogmatic issues (such as the famous'Filioque'dispute) fueling the Schism between Rome and Constantinople. What were the "errors" which imbedded themselves so deeply in the Byzantine psyche that they caused such fanatical hostility towards Westerners and a massive resistance to the union of the Churches? The Latins were guilty of pillaging and looting during the first 3 Crusades and the horrific sacking of Constantinople, but pious Byzantines were further assured by religious propaganda that the Latin "heretics" were, in addition, vulgar barbarians, alien to refined manners, indecent, and "utterly filthy in their failure to distinguish between sacred things, people, actions, and profane ones". Byzantine grievances were many: Latins ate unclean foods, had contact with bodily excretions, spit near the altar, consecrated a new pope by laying the hands of a dead pope upon him, used icons for toilet seats, etc., etc. These Lists of Latin errors constituted a fascinating species of Hate-literature, but they had a special effect on the Byzantine masses in making them fear, despise, and contemn their conquerors as well as the Byzantine unionists seeking to overcome "cross-cultural misunderstandings" exacerbated by chauvinistic and xenophobic polemics. Not all Byzantines, of course, fell victim to such irrational propaganda but such Lists clearly manifested "the most extreme manifestation of anti-Latin sentiment in Byzantium". Interestingly, this scholarly study reveals that the Byzantine theologians who contributed to the Lists evidenced some serious confusion concerning doctrine and discipline and what constituted necessary and optional elements of the faith. Dr.Kolbaba utilizes the insights of cultural anthropologists and studies in the sociology of religion to analyze in some depth the psychology of medieval Greeks whose Byzantine orthodoxy and orthopraxis was fixated in liturgical and ritual forms regarded as sacred and immutable. Students of Byzantine history, and Catholics and Eastern Orthodox seeking to understand the dynamics of the Byzantine Greco-Slav Schism will find this an enlightening study that can only further genuine ecumenism.

Tia Kolbaba has written a fairly short, but very informative work regarding attitudes of the Greek Christians toward Latins. Beginning in the 11th century many Greek Religious authors composed lists of errors which the Western Church was guilty of. Among the errors listed are matters of foods eaten, religious rituals such as Lenten Fasting and Baptism, dress, behaviors such as marriage and a Latin addition to the Nicene Creed known as the Filioque (the addition of the words; "and the Son", to the procession of the Holy Spirit in the Creed - the Greeks retained the original "from the father", without this addition).

Kolbaba discusses which errors are listed and the frequency with which they are found in the various lists. This is a very interesting portion of the work; however those who have read one of the History's of the Byzantine Empire such as Vasiliev, Ostrogorsky or Treadgold will find later portions more valuable for it is here that she turns to a discussion of what these lists tell us - not about the Latins but about the Greeks themselves.

First Kolbaba discusses how many of the Greeks participate in the same errors as the Latins. She believes that many of these lists were not meant primarily to turn the Greeks against the Latins, but rather to argue that, by engaging in these behaviors, Greeks resembled them. While this is a form of demonization, it is more along the lines of, "You shouldn't be doing that - you behave like a barbarian!" For a society which prided itself on its perceived superiority to the West, this could be very powerful.

In later chapters Kolbaba discusses the general change in tone contained in these lists over time. Where earlier lists decry the Latin errors, they are less hostile and many state that almost all of the errors, with the exception of the Filioque, while wrong, may be forgiven as not reflecting a loss of truth regarding religion. However the later lists become progressively more hostile toward the Latins and tend to point out more negatives not related to religion, such as the barbarians being unreliable, uncouth, loud, violent, uneducated, etc. For obvious reasons, this becomes even more pronounced after 1204. At its extreme, these involve pure demonizing - priests use icons as toilet seats, bathe in urine and use the ashes of animals in rituals.

This also serves as a very interesting illustration of how societies, when threatened, become more conservative and tend to pull into themselves, battling mightily to preserve their sense of what they are and retain what makes their place in the world unique. As any Byzantine student knows, the last half century or so of the Byzantine Empire contained several instances of the olive branch from the West being dangled before them - resolve the schism and join your Church to ours and an Army will come to save you. Whether any army would have staved off the inevitable is arguable. What is not is that when Emperors such as Michael Palaiologos gave any indication that they might accept such an offer, the residents of what remained of the Empire rose powerfully against it.

This was a very enjoyable work. Kolbaba uses an interesting method to organize her work but one which works quite well. If I have a criticism, I believe a bit more time could have been spent on the Latin reaction to these Lists. Were they offended? How often did letters arrive from the West reacting to the latest slander - as they surely perceived it - against their religious practices? Or were they relatively uncaring? Certainly the West wrote their own lists of errors of the Byzantines, but what did they think of these lists written in the East?

In any case, this work will make valuable reading for anyone interested in what the Greeks thought of their Western contemporaries; as well as giving a great deal of insight into how their society defended itself culturally against the physically stronger west; and how the Eastern Empire responded to its approaching destruction.

This book challenges the reader to know why you believe and what you believe as taught by God in His Holy Scriptures. Ir helps you to turn back to the Bible for discerning truth from lies. An eye-opener for all Christians!

This book is an excellent wake-up call that will get you questioning your assumptions about "casual Christianity" -- the slogans you hear in popular culture, the teachings of church groups that try to be popular and not condemn any behaviour, etc. It makes you think about "Why am I repeating this [belief/slogan]? Is there any Biblical truth to this? Where does it come from?" It's not too bad a book but I was a bit put off by its strongly Protestant evangelical bent. Catholics reading this book in particular should remember the importance of Sacred Tradition and that it is also a legitimate authority.

Two pairs of identical twins separated at birth come together in the same city, neither pair aware that the other is there. This sets the stage for a maddening series of mistaken-identity mishaps. The mistakes at first are small but annoying, but as the play progresses, they become larger and more serious until both pairs of twins are bound and imprisoned, and then a series of low-probability coincidences puts everything aright.

As I listened to the play, I couldn't help but think "The Three Stooges meet Lucy and Ricky." Unlike most modern situation comedies, "A Comedy of Errors" relies rather heavily on slapstick humor. At first the plot was a little off-putting, but as the situation became more and more tangled, it became more and more interesting, until at the end Shakespeare's deus-ex-machina resolution was quite pleasant. One of Shakespeare's better comedies, done superbly by Arkangel Shakespeare.

An outstanding performance of one of my favorite plays:
The sound effects added a slapstick comedy feel to the play, making the scenery almost come alive as you listen. If you are not familiar with the play, I highly recommend reading it first, as I feel you will enjoy it far more.

This is a good, basic text -- there are only a few questionable spelling issues, and don't look to the footnotes to provide any useful information, whatsoever.

The plot of this play is exactly the kind of thing for which the term "madcap" was coined. More so than many of Shakespeare's plays, the humor has survived the many changes our culture has undergone since his time. It's easy to see the similarity between this plot and any number of sitcom plots ranging from the "I Love Lucy" show all the way up through "Sabrina the Teenaged Witch" and "That Seventies Show". In fact, the plot device of twins causing mistaken identity was a VERY frequent device in the old "Patty Duke Show" back in the sixties (functionally as antiquated as Shakespeare's time to most young people). In fact, the semi-modern comic style that this play MOST reminds me of is "Abbott and Costello"; I can VERY easily envision Bud and Lou as the Antipholuses and Dromios, respectively.

All of which just goes to prove that Shakespeare wasn't, at least in his comedies, writing "literature". He was writing pop culture, and in some ways, pop culture hasn't changed a bit in 400 years.

To the most senior airline captain,and the "Top Gun" pilots in the military,to the first time Solo pilot, this book would make all take that second Look at being a Safe Pilot. "Live to Learn and Learn to Live"

I am not much of a fan of the "Controlling Pilot Error" series, as I think they are frequently too generalized, and in some cases technically inaccurate. Having said that, Daryl Smith has written one of the better volumes in the series with this book on CFIT.

Smith discusses many scenarios of CFIT (Controlled Flight Into Terrain) and includes many real-world examples with generally disastrous endings. Most of these accidents boil down to low Situational Awareness (SA) or complacency, but a wide enough cross-section is examined to keep the reader interested.

One critique (a problem in the other volumes as well) is there are numerous grammatical, spelling, and especially subject-verb agreement/tense errors in the book. I am seriously wondering who proofread these volumes. Some of them are fairly innocuous (such as calling an L-1011 an L10-11 starting on page 26), but many are truly glaring.

Smith covers the United 173 (UA 173, Portland) and Eastern 401 (EA 401, Everglades) accidents in particular detail, and for good reason. Not only are they vivid examples, but they both ultimately became the parents of Crew Resource Management (CRM) years later. I have no real complaints with the UA 173 accident coverage, but the EA 401 accident coverage does contain some technical errors (I have a type rating on the L-1011, and although most of the details are insignificant, a few are truly misleading) that I noticed, particularly in relation to Autopilot mode (Command vs. Control Wheel Steering [CWS]), as well as a few other systems inaccuracies.

Smith does tackle the interesting results of the Milgram Obedience Study (page 116) including the concept of "Destructive Obedience" that can truly be a killer in the cockpit. Although I was familiar with the study, this was the first widely distributed aviation book I have seen it discussed in.

Smith presents a good overview of the American 965 accident in Cali, Columbia, but here (and elsewhere in the book) he makes several generalized and incorrect statements regarding Flight Management Systems (FMS), and doesn't really correctly explore spoiler retraction during a go-around (GA); note that spoilers are automatically retracted in GA mode on the L-1011 and some Airbus aircraft, though not on the B-757.

I personally do not revere Chuck Yeager, but Smith discusses Yeager's dedication to knowing his aircraft thoroughly, and I think that is a model that all pilots should follow. I salute Smith (and Yeager) for making this point so eloquently in the book.

Starting with the premise than most CFIT accidents begin with loss of SA (normally related to terrain proximity), Smith undertakes an excellent introduction to the different types of altitudes pilots must be aware of (MEA, MCA, MVA, MOCA, MORA, MSA, etc.) starting on page 210. This is an excellent review for all pilots, and should be studied repeatedly by new instrument-rated pilots, especially. On the down side, Smith makes an erroneous statement concerning Backcourse Localizer approaches in most HSI equipped aircraft on page 242. This goes back to Yeager's doctrine of knowing your aircraft: different information is presented in many ways in different aircraft; know how yours works before you go fly (especially in IMC).

Overall, I was pleased with this book; it has many good lessons, and despite a few obtuse technical deficiencies, the points it makes are all on target. For that reason I recommend it to pilots of all experience levels, especially new instrument pilots.

Many technical professionals (and others as well) think technology has the answers and the solutions to many of the issues / failures we have experienced in the past. WRONG!!

Read this precious book to understand why.

Although somewhat dated (considerting we are in 2006) - the basic tenets still apply. Be forewarned - you need to read it with an open mind and a willingness to be brutally honest about your answers when the author poses some questions to you.
With such a paradigm, you will find the book full of value in understanding the types of errors we make as humans. Once you recognize these, preventing them can become feasible. But, just realizing that is not enough, you will need to change (which is very hard to do) some habits that the workplace has built into you over time.

Enjoy - and be error free...if you can, if you care...

I came across this title while researching the parallels between traditional professional engineering and systems engineering. Petroski makes a compelling case for us to formally study our failures in systems engineering - not for laying blame, but in order to continually improve our processes, assumptions, beliefs, methods, and thinking patterns. Using case studies from bridge building, ship building, and other construction feats, Petroski show us how errors in scalability, design changes, selective use of history, logic, and human factors can lead to disasterous consequences. If you care about public safety and want to see any industry progress to a real level of professionalism, read and study this work.