"Luxenberg’s work has been widely panned by the larger scholarly community as being methodologically faulty."
Since the reviewer states Luxenberg has been "widely panned," is it too much to ask that he identify sources?
Mark Brumley • a day ago • parent − "How embarrassing for you that in a review criticizing my work for faulty methodology, mistaken analysis, etc." Hmm. I can see pros and cons re: the review--I haven't read the book yet although I have read others on the thesis, which is problematic, to say the least. Whether Bob overcomes problem remains (for me) to be seen. Let's say I am skeptical. Even so, I can understand, Bob, why you're not too keen on the review. But is it really "embarrassing" that the apostrophe was wrongly placed and if so, it is any more than a slight editorial embarrassment? And is it really relevant to the assessment of the reviewer's analytical skills? Really?
Robert Spencer • 2 days ago − How embarrassing for you that in a review criticizing my work for faulty methodology, mistaken analysis, etc., you persistently misplace the apostrophe in "Qur'an." Not a ringing testimony to your own attention to detail or analytical skills.
Ed.: Robert Spencer - Thanks for pointing out the misplaced apostrophe. That correction has been made.
Muhammad: Man or Myth? July 23, 2012 A review of Robert Spencer’s Did Muhammad Exist? An Inquiry into Islam’s Obscure Origins J. Mark Nicovich, Ph.D.
http://www.catholicworldreport.com/Item/1497/muhammad_man_or_myth.aspx