It was ok but hard to follow

You might relly love this book if your a big English reader. But for me it was a little hard to follofollow.

I'm sure there's something that I'm missing on the science side of things, but I don't know how you could get a child interested in science better than with a nature lore kind of book like this one.

This is a very interesting and unique book. It is a book about science from the 1860s, written in a very imaginative and engaging style, as if the reader is listening to a father teaching his son all about the world around him, using plenty of imagination and a poetic style.

Obviously, a book from t

This book is a mix of the best ideas (the sections on eyes and no eyes, analysis vs synthesis, etc), the worst ideas (the purpose of an earthquake) and generally good ideas (geological descriptions).

The good parts are so very good, the bad so very ugly. With my second student I will use only the bes

It's like he's always talking down to the reader.

"Now little kid, I would tell you about this and this but you're too stupid, not old and wise and clever like me... Ah hah! Here is something you might comprehend! I will talk a bit about it. But THAT, oh, don't even try to think about such and such,