The Lost Symbol (Dan Brown)
by Dan Brown
|
List Price: Our Price: $2.44 You Save: $27.51 (92%) Availability: Usually ships in 1-2 business days Buy Used: from $0.01 (click here) Category: Book See more book details and other editions |
|---|
Book Reviews of The Lost Symbol (Dan Brown)
Book Review: Dan Brown doing what Dan Brown does best...not writing...
Summary: 2 Stars
Dan Brown once again proved why he has legions of adoring fans who eat up everything he writes: he is an absolute master of weaving together intricate puzzles, based on various ancient mythologies and symbolism, that almost always have multiple layers. Unfortunately, it seems he has spent all of his time weaving these puzzles and then not enough time learning how to write. I know, I know, "It's just for entertainment. You shouldn't criticize his writing, since he's not trying to be Victor Hugo." Fair enough...I have read all the Langdon books and will read the next one, for that exact reason. It's entertaining, and I like the puzzles. That doesn't mean I can't criticize his writing style. I find myself holding my nose while reading his books, then genuinely enjoying the 25% or so in which puzzles are actually being solved.
A few main criticisms:
1.) Entirely too much use of italics. Not only are all the character's thoughts italicized, but virtually every sentence that they speak has a few italics thrown in for emphasis. People just don't talk like that in everyday speech.
2.) His characters sound like encyclopedias. Way too many passages where I feel like I'm sitting in a lecture hall.
3.) Virtually every chapter ends on a cliffhanger. His writing is bad enough (see point 8) that that's about the only way he can keep people turning the page to see what happens next. Not only do the chapters all end on cliffhangers, but there are numerous places where the characters have already been made privy to some secret information which, for some reason, is withheld from the reader. That's just annoying. If you want to put off the secrets for a little longer, don't reveal them to all the main characters.
4.) He plays very loose with facts. I know it's fiction. And that's fine. But there are inexcusable factual errors in here that could be cured with a simple Googling. More than that, they are things that any semi-educated person (as Brown presumably is) should know without having to Google. I don't want to spoil it, but I'll just say that there's a certain government agency that dramatically oversteps its legal authorities, and no one even notices. Maybe you can respond that it was just going rogue and knew it was out-of-bounds but didn't care. Well...it doesn't come across that way. And it doesn't appear that Brown has any clue how wrong he got it. If he did, then his highly-educated protagonist would have at least had an italicized thought along the lines of "Hey, they aren't suppose to be doing that." The problem could have been fixed with a simple "search and replace," in MS Word. He also takes what are, at best, fringe beliefs and promotes them as fact. Sorry Dan, but the word "Amen" is not derived from the name of "Amon Ra." A cursory internet search will show that this is a myth with no academic backing. Langdon would know that. If you're going to present fringe beliefs as true, at least have your uber-booksmart protagonist identify them as fringe beliefs. Then, if you want, have them turn out to be true, to your protagonist's utter shock.
5.) Noetics. Give me a freaking BREAK. This is one of the most utterly vacuous ideas around, ranking right up there with astrology and Scientology. Okay, this isn't a criticism of his writing, so much as my rant about the fact that the enormous popularity of Brown's books is going to spark public interest in this "science." If Katherine Solomon presented her "research" to any reputable academic publication or at a major university, she would be laughed back into obscurity where she belongs. The book tries to defend itself against this criticism by saying that "round earthers" used to be laughed at. Yeah, maybe. But you know what the difference was? They had actual evidence to support the idea that the earth was round. It's called circumnavigation. It's the fact that the sail is the last part of a ship to disappear over the horizon. If the history of science shows one thing, it's that it accepts new ideas when they have evidence. Scientists are perhaps the one group of people on earth who can be generally trusted to discard former prejudices when the facts illustrate that they were wrong. It is overwhelmingly common in science...politics and religion, not so much. It happened with evolution. It happened with relativity and quantum mechanics. Ideas that would have been considered absurd by earlier generations were proven because, once they became testable, the evidence was conclusive. People have been obsessed with finding hidden powers in the human mind for centuries. The reason scientists laugh at such absurdities is because, after centuries of trying, no one has produced anything coming close to evidence for ESP or telekinesis. In fact, there have been studies done of "the power of prayer" which pretty conclusively proved that sick people who receive prayers don't tend to get better quicker than those who don't receive prayers. The worst thing about this book is that it will result in a surge in popularity in yet another indefensible form of vacuous nonsense. As if we needed any more than we already have.
6.) The book is essentially a fractal pattern. The entire story consists of repeated examples of Langdon taking the skeptic's view of a situation, only for someone to pull a magic act and show that, "gasp! there really is something mystical and literal behind this weird old legend after all!" Then, towards the end, we find that these repeated examples are really just building up to another example that is the sum of all previous examples.
7.) The "grave threat to national security" is an absolute joke. At worst, it would destroy the political lives of a few people who probably should never have been voted into office in the first place.
8.) The writing is beyond bad. It's almost apocalyptically bad. The screenplay to Bill and Ted's Excellent Adventure looks like Shakespeare by comparison. At least that movie was intentionally corny. Brown's language is corny and hilarious, but not intentionally so. I had to wear earplugs and hold my nose just to make it through the conversations that the characters hold with each other. Even then, my mouth tasted like I had just eaten brussel sprouts. A bit of advice for Brown. It is perfectly okay to use a an awe-insipring noun, a extremely old verb, or a legendary adjective without famously modifying them by using luxurious adjectives and erudite adverbs.
Book Review: How many times...
Summary: 3 Stars
... can Robert Langdon possibly emphasize that the target of his search-- the portal leading to the pyramid leading to the Ancent Mystery whatever-- is metaphorical, not literal? And how many times can he do it in ITALICS? (Here typed in all-caps.)
Well, let's see.
Page 117: '"You're saying the secret he believes is hidden in Washington... is a FANTASY?"
Langton nodded. "A very old myth."'
Page 118: '"Let's just say I'm a skeptic," he told Sato. "I have never seen anything in the real world to suggest the xxx is anything other than legend-- a recurring mythological archetype."
Page 119: '"So you believe the xxx is a METAPHOR."
"Of course," said Langton.'
Page 186: '"I AM familiar with the legend, Director, but it's pure fantasy... one of DC's most recurring myths."'
And in case you weren't sure yet,
Page 187: '"Again, I stress this is all myth,"'
But wait! There's more!
Page 188: '"Obviously you don't believe that such a xxx exists."
"Of course not," Langdon replied. "There's no evidence whatsoever..."'
This is the same xxx as last time, by the way.
Page 189: '"By ANY name, the xxx is a fairy tale. It's purely fantasy."'
On page 234 he reaches a breakthrough: 'IT"S A MYTH, FOR HEAVEN'S SAKE!'
And rises to rhapsodic heights on page 241: '"You're chasing a MYTH!... The xxx is FICTION."'
But on page 270 he does away with his doubt once and for all: '"...it is always referred to as the LEGEND of the xxx. LEGEND implies that it is mythical."'
On page 359, shockingly, he admits: '"All night, I've had the feeling we're treating as reality a collection of myths and allegories."' No! Say it ain't so! But then he delivers the killing blow: '"Maybe the inscription is pointing to a METAPHORICAL..."' Gosh, really? Well, that came out of nowhere. But on page 360 we gain a deeper insight as to why he may feel this way, when he reveals, '"it seems to be more METAPHORICAL than..."'
At this point another character breaks in and tries to rap poor Langdon across the head. '"No, the map is quite real, I assure you. And it points to a very REAL location."'
You'd think the emphasis on REAL would help Langdon to understand just how REAL it is. But no, there are some minds that even an overabundance of italics won't change.
On page 410 Langdon cleverly slips in, '"Apparently the xxx is more of a METAPHORICAL map than a geographic one."'
And then on page 411 he reminds us, '"As I mentioned--'" did he mention it? I hadn't noticed, better remind me-- '"the map seems to be more FIGURATIVE than--"
"You're mistaken..."' says yet another character trying to point out what even the most brain-dead reader must have guessed by now. "The xxx is a REAL map. It points to a REAL location."' If this sounds familiar, yes, these lines are nearly identical to the ones on page 360. Or rather, I should say, they ARE nearly identical.
But on page 557 there is no end of a shock when we discover '"There is no actual XXX. It's all a metaphor-- a SYMBOL of the xxx."'
Okay, so by this point we're all pretty sure the xxx will turn out to be literal after all. But Langdon may still have just a little problem with this...
Page 612: '"The xxx... is not a legend. It is a REALITY."
Langdon stared... "You're saying you believe the xxx is REAL... and that it has actual POWER?"'
Breakthrough! Maybe we can finally finish with the denial!
Or maybe not.
On page 614, Langdon says, '"this is an allegorical pictogram. Clearly its language is metaphorical and symbolic rather than literal."'
Well. I didn't see that one coming, did you? Around page 618 Dan Brown despairs of getting the idea into our thick skulls using such subtle methods, and is driven to assure us outright that 'Langdon was having trouble taking any of this seriously'. And in case you still didn't understand, page 639 might mention that 'Langdon was having a hard time accepting it.'
Okay, I'm getting tired of typing out all these quotes. By the way, I left out the lines where Langdon is just referred to as a skeptic, or refuses to believe something, or says he's on a wild goose chase. I tried to only focus on the lines which made the specific point about the mystical pyramid quest being a metaphor (a METAPHOR) rather than a literal (LITERAL) quest.
And what is up with the annoying italics? Is it really necessary to emphasize that the desk was BEHIND the door, or that the pot is a PASTA pot, or that something fluttered AWAY from the room?
And then the science is just plain wrong. At one point a character seriously suggests that thoughts have mass, and... '"If a thought has mass, then a thought exerts gravity and can pull things towards it."' Or, with a random and patronizing sprinkling of italics: '"And BECAUSE this grain of sand has mass, it therefore exerts GRAVITY."' (As George Eliot put it, I hope that these italics assist the reader's comprehension.) I wouldn't mind the silliness of this whole thing if it weren't for the claim, made at the beginning of the book, that all the science is real. All I'm saying is, even if your thoughts could influence the world around you, they wouldn't do so through gravity. Not unless the power revealed by Noetic Science is something like the ablity to attract meteorites towards your head. I think there's a basic misunderstanding of the definition of gravity here.
My review's dragging on a bit, so I'll end it here. On the bright side, this book is a light read-- and even if you don't feel like reading it, you can use it for a game of 'Find the phrase with the most UNNECESSARY italics'. Play with your friends! It's fun! My favorite candidates are: "might I ask about the ETHICAL dilemma posed by your work?" (they weren't talking about any other kinds of dilemmas), '"it is worn by the Mason in charge of PROTECTING the xxx"' (they weren't talking about any other Masonic tasks), and '"As I'm sure you know, there is a historical and symbolic REASON"' (he never suggested that there wasn't a reason, and as a matter of fact he already knows it, so why emphasize REASON? Your guess is as good as mine.)
Book Review: Brown Covers Up the Book's Flaws...Until The End
Summary: 2 Stars
The ending sucked.
Sorry to be so abrupt, but I appreciate that this is a long review, and I appreciate that you might not finish it, and unlike some other book reviewers, I can't, in good conscience, discuss The Lost Symbol without bringing up the end. That's unfortunate for Dan Brown because the first 450 pages of his new thriller were a ton of fun. They were filled with all the elements that Brown fans (myself included) have come to love and expect: cryptic puzzles, fast-moving aircrafts, and dull historical locations made exciting.
But the ending sucked.
Or maybe it only seemed like it sucked; maybe if Robert Langdon, the seemingly omniscient professor protagonist from Angels & Demons and The Da Vinci Code were to read The Lost Symbol and peel back its layers, he'd discover that Brown didn't drop the ball at the book's end; he covered up the book's flaws until then.
But they had to come out sooner or later.
Yes, Professor of symbology Rober Langdon's is back, and he's still solving puzzles, and his dialogue is still stiffer than the Washington monument: "This idea that there exists some kind of ancient knowledge that can imbue men with great power...I simply can't take it seriously." But the dialogue is par for the course--"the course" encompassing not only Brown's earlier works, but also the genre in which he writes.
As flat as Langdon's words sound, the professor has actually grown more human/less godlike in the past five years; it now takes him more than, oh, four seconds to solve a nearly impossible riddle. Langdon's external life too has changed too, since his days running through he Louvre: "Ever since his experiences in Europe over the last several years, Langdon's unwanted celebrity had made him a magnet for nutcases...Grail fanatics had followed the media coverage closely, some connecting the dots and believing Langdon was now privy to secret information regarding the Holy Grail--perhaps even its location."
It doesn't take a Harvard professor to see that Brown is talking about himself there. Ditto for this exchange between professor Langdon and one of his readers:
"My book group read your book about the sacred feminine and the church! What a delicious scandal that one caused! You do enjoy putting the fox in the henhouse!"
Langdon smiled. "Scandal wasn't really my intention."
Unlike The Da Vinci Code, The Lost Symbol won't ruffle feathers, let alone cause a "delicious scandal." The book's featured secret society, the Freemasons, are politically benign. (Sure, some individual Masons hold political power, but their society membership is unconnected, substantively, to their politics.) Apparently Brown's new villain, a transformation-obsessed tattooed bodybuilder named Mal'akh, didn't get the memo--he believes the Masons are withholding the secrets to the universe from the rest of mankind.
The Lost Symbol's plot kicks off when Mal'akh kidnaps professor Langdon's friend Peter. Mal'ach tells Langdon he'll free Peter once he (Langdon) solves the Freemason's puzzles and discovers their secrets. So Langdon and Peter's sister Katherine (a "Noetics scientist" [i.e., a person who's convinced herself that Psychokinesis is a legitimate science and tries to convince others of the same {and probably will convince Brown's less skeptical readers, given 1) the authority with which she speaks and 2) the reverence her brother Peter and, disappointingly, professor Langdon afford her}]) run around Washington DC trying to solve Masonic puzzles.
Except for when they're trying not to solve them. See, Peter (the guy Langdon is trying to rescue) told Langdon not to unlock the mysteries of the Freemasons, and Langdon wants desperately to respect his friend's wishes, and Langdon's ambivalence severely cuts into the book's momentum. For example, look to this dialogue between professor Langson and Katherine:
"He stood poised, pencil in hand, and yet...strangely, after all this enthusiasm, he seemed to hesitate.
`Robert?'
He turned to her, his expression one of trepidation. `Are you sure we want to do this? Peter expressly--`
`Robert, if you don't want to decipher this engraving, then I will.'"
The thing that keeps The Lost Symbol moving along is Brown's implicit promise that in the end, a tangible secret will be uncovered (like the one in Da Vinci Code about Jesus having a kid). Langdon keeps asking, Are you sure we're not speaking in metaphors here? Are you sure we're dealing with something tangible?, and everybody (Peter, Mal'ach, the CIA) keeps assuring him, No metaphors here; we're being literal.
Quasi-spoiler alert: Langdon's suspicions were well founded.
On a similar note, for a couple hundred pages, Mal'akh and the CIA insist the stakes couldn't be higher, so Langdon (along with the reader) is led to believe that if he (Langdon) doesn't solve the Freemasons puzzles, the world as we know will crumble to pieces for some reason or other. (Or is it that will the world crumble if he does solve them? One of the two.)
Turns out the potential danger in question is something that could be fixed by a focused PR campaign.
When Brown got to the end of the story, I suspect he thought to himself Oops! I haven't made the stakes high enough and I haven't revealed a tangible secret. I've got to throw in something that will rival Da Vinci Code in scope. And then, in an attempt to artificially raise the stakes, Brown throws a Hail Mary pass in the form of a Platonic dialogue about the nature of God. It comes off as ham-fisted and borderline preachy.
I said that I enjoyed the book's first 450 pages, and I did. At the time. But the book left a bitter taste in my mouth that grows bitterer and bitterer as time goes by. So here's what I recommend: buy a copy of The Lost Symbol, read the first 450 pages, and then throw the book away. Yes, you could try to think up your own satisfying ending, but if Brown couldn't think of one--and believe me, he couldn't--the odds are against you. No offense.
I'm sorry to be the bearer of bad news--believe me, I wanted to like this one too.
Book Review: Roller Coaster Ride
Summary: 5 Stars
THE SETUP
Peter Solomon, the director of the Smithsonian Institution, is abducted by a strange person named Abadon, partly for the purpose of forcing symbologist Robert Langdon to help him (Abadon) discover the ultimate secret of Freemasonry, which Abadon believes is all he needs to be transformed into a genuine immortal demon. Abadon has a vendetta with the Solomon family, having murdered Peter's mother some years earlier. Peter's sister Catherine (a noetics researcher) joins Langdon in the search for Peter, which requires unraveling the Masonic symbolic mysteries of Washington D.C. That's the setup. Additional details would be spoilers.
COMMENT
What many, perhaps most, readers fail to realize is that the Robert Langdon novels all have exactly the same theme. The theme is an "alternate" (alternate to the government-approved version of spirituality taught by the priests to the masses) spiritual tradition which predates Christianity, and which is continued in little-known Christian sects (as well as within obscure Jewish and Islamic sects). Virtually every detail in Brown's novels is accurate (to the extent such details have been previously published), including the history of the sects, the descriptions of the doctrines, the symbols, and descriptions of ancient traditions. These traditions represents the theology of the "enlightened" from Pythagoras to Dante to DiVinci to Thomas Jefferson. While the corresponding doctrines of some sects in the tradition are open to debate, the tradition is never-the-less historical reality. "The Lost Symbol" concentrates on Freemasonry, which while not exactly a religious sect, nevertheless identifies with this tradition. For example some groups within the large umbrella of Freemasons call themselves Knights Templar---which historically was a (renegade?) monastic order of the Roman Catholic Church.
Since publication, Masons have refuted some details, but Brown was accurate to the extent that details had previously been published at the time he wrote the novel. Mythology and allegory are major components of Masonry. My understanding is that few (if any) Masons themselves know exactly where Masonic mythology ends and real history begins, so we should cut Brown a little slack on that score.
In a way, a theme of "The Lost Symbol" is heresy and heretics. (By the way, the literal, not figurative, meaning of "heretic" is "one who thinks for himself"). In "The Divinci Code" and "Angels & Demons," Brown presented ideas considered heretical by the Catholic Church. Therefore Brown was reviled by Catholics and became the darling of progressive liberals, who just accepted the spirituality as necessary fiction (as a vehicle) for the anti-Catholic tirade. However, in "The Lost Symbol" (and actually in the earlier Langdon novels as well) Brown has presented ideas heretical to progressive liberalism (e.g., that evil may actually exist, the assertion that spirituality has value, and the historical fact that "rational spirituality" been a major force in the world since antiquity, and remains so). It is Brown's blasphemous challenge of established ideology which has earned "The Lost Symbol" so many negative reviews. Hell hath no fury like a progressive liberal rebuffed.
It is remarkable that revolutionaries almost always end up perpetuating and even exacerbating the evils they rebelled against. Modern progressive liberals are far more rigidly doctrinaire and grimly intolerant of dissent than the "system" which they justifiably rebeled against. I'm no fan of the Catholic Church, nor even fundamentalist Christianity, but I find progressive liberalism at least equally oppressive.
CRITIQUE
Although containing numerous minor implausibilities, inconsistences, and at least a few downright errors, "The Lost Symbol" is engaging and entertaining.
Such a book requires a straight-man, as played by Robert Langdon. Langdon is sometimes oddly skeptical of trivial, widely believed (even if unproven) historical assertions. At other times he is much too quick to accept fantastic claims, based on little or no evidence. At times Langdon makes brilliant deductions, at other times he is thwarted by the most minor logical challenge. It might be better to have a "Scully" and "Molder" pair to play these rolls.
Character development is formulaic, but this is an action novel--far too many authors have listened to critics and ruined perfectly good action novels with wasted pages and chapters of "development" of uninteresting characters. Pacing is erratic, but so is that in a roller-coaster ride. Indeed "The Lost Symbol" is about the closest literary equivalent of a roller-coaster ride that I can imagine.
I found the plot predictable, and solved several of the key mysteries (Abadon's identity and the "winding staircase") at an early point. But that did not distract from enjoyment of the story. Unlike many reviewers, I think that it is good storytelling technique to give the reader the satisfaction of being "smarter" than the protagonist, at least on some story elements.
As in other Brown novels, Brown spends far too much time unnecessarily pushing the high questionable ultimate implications of his theses. For example, why not (in "The DiVinci Code") leave some mystery regarding the nature of the Grail? Brown's interpretation is only one of many. Similarly, although not a son-of-the-widow, I'm sure that different Masons get different things out of Masonry, and have different beliefs about what the ultimate mysteries may be. Why not leave some mystery?
As purely fictional modern action-mystery, "The Lost Symbol" rates perhaps 3 1/2 stars. But as historical fiction, Brown earns another more star for his extraordinary research, and excellent presentation of the historical facts.
THE VERDICT
The Lost Symbol is a fantastic ride of non-stop suspense, filled with fascinating mysteries. So much so, that when I finished, I turned back to page one, and started the novel again.
Book Review: Let Dan Brown speak
Summary: 3 Stars
The Lost Symbol is definitely a Dan Brown book. It breaks everything into short chapters that constantly switch scenes, has a plot twist, and has its archetypal super-nasty bad guy. It uses action at a frenetic pace to cover any weakness in facts or plot (like Star Wars). This is what one expects from Brown, and he doesn't fail us in this book if that's why you read his novels. As usual, he goes way out on a limb with some of the information he presents, but this time around, the limb breaks.
Except for the villain, the characters in the book are suffering from some brain-crippling disease. This makes them easy pickings for the puppet-master, who knows just how to play them until the plot twist, when he also succumbs to the same brain freeze as everyone else. I hoped for better, but I'll accept what I got.
Rather than trying to describe what I thought was wrong, I'll let the book speak for itself. All bracketed entries are mine, either to put the quote in context or to make some snide remark. The first quote, I liked, but after that, they go downhill rapidly.
p10: I am a masterpiece. [Mal'akh is indeed a piece of work.]
p34: The truth was that Katherine was doing science so advanced [Noetic Science - more advanced than Creation Science or even Homeopathic Science] that it no longer even resembled science. [The resemblance is indeed faint.]
p148: An unusual, fetid odor wafted out of the darkness. [Elemental sulfur smells fetid?]
p152: Ethanol fumes wafted out as she reached down into the [specimen preservation] tank and flipped a switch just above the liquid line. [It must be a special switch not to ignite the fumes. (Ethanol fumes burn violently with just a spark.)]
p182: Seventy-five feet overhead, stained-glass skylights glistened between paneled beams adorned with rare "aluminum leaf" - a metal that was considered more precious than gold at one time. [The Library of Congress (Thomas Jefferson building) was completed in 1897, when Alcoa was producing cheap aluminum using the Hall-Héroult process - far less than the price of silver and nowhere near the price of gold.]
p185: The security guard was on his way, and for some unknown reason, her attacker smelled strongly of ethanol. [Ethanol smells vaguely sweet (if you can smell it at all); water has a much stronger smell. Any other odors come from contaminants.]
p200: Normally, a two-inch-tall object would not be an issue of national security unless it was made of enriched plutonium. [Who isotopically enriches plutonium? It's useful because it's already enriched when it's created.]
p208: Katherine's work here had begun using modern science to answer ancient philosophical questions. Does anyone hear our prayers? Is there Life after death? Do humans have souls? [Does this have anything to do with science?]
p209: Mal'akh hurried now into the lab and retrieved the Pyrex jug of Bunsen-burner fuel - a viscous, highly flammable, yet noncombustible oil. [Will fuel oil also work with a Meker-Fischer burner? How do you convert it from using natural gas? And do they use Pyrex because they heat the jug rapidly?]
p268: He felt pure again, having washed off the last remaining scent of ethanol. [He probably thought that smelling sweet clashed with his personality.]
p313: Science and mysticism are very closely related, distinguishable only by their approaches. They have identical goals...but different methods. [PZ Myers needs to be notified.]
p335: Different substances incandesce at different temperatures. ... Think of a mood ring. Just put it on your finger, and it changes color from body heat. [This is incandescence?]
p335: The early alchemists used organic phosphors all the time as thermal markers. [Because they incandesce so readily?]
p392: Noetic Science clearly suggested that thoughts had mass, and so it stood to reason, then, that the human soul might therefore also have mass. [Of course!]
p495: The results were conclusive and irrefutable, with the potential to transform skeptics into believers and affect global consciousness on a massive scale. [...and any concerns about her methods would evaporate.]
p498: Katherine was apparently familiar with the [Capitol] dome's startling acoustical properties...because the wall whispered back. [The focal points of a sphere are at its edge?]
p498: The science of Noetics may be new, but it's actually the oldest science on earth - the study of human thought. ..."And we're learning that the ancients actually understood thought more profoundly than we do today."
p499: "Your brother tried to convince me that the Bible is encoded with scientific information." "It certainly is," she said... [Anyone who has seen the movie Time Changer already knows that "the only science worth knowing is in the Bible". After all, the Bible has all the details for building a time machine.]
p499 - p500: The human brain, in advanced states of focus, will physically create a waxlike substance from the pineal gland. This brain secretion is unlike anything else in the body. It has an incredible healing effect, can literally regenerate cells, and may be one of the reasons yogis live so long. This is real science. [How do you recognize fake science? Ask a fakir?]
p500: The Bible, like many ancient texts, is a detailed exposition of the most sophisticated machine ever created...the human mind.
p500: Within a matter of years, modern man will be forced to accept what is now unthinkable: our minds can generate energy capable of transforming physical matter. [Better than a philosopher's stone.]
p501: God is very real - a mental energy that pervades everything. And we, as human beings, have been created in that image[.]