I'd take a guess and qualify that 'amusement' with 'superciliousQuote
I read the review all the way through--with amusement.
In that case, I challenge you to read it, understanding everything, and never having to stop and re-read here and there. Shouldn't take you long- it is not a long book.Quote
The reviewer indicated what was left out (almost everything), which was scathing.
That sounds like more superciliousness to me.Quote
He nonetheless recommended it for the general public who have little or no scientific background.
Given that he regards it as almost without scientific content, I'd regard his recommendation as "faint praise"--not my kettle of fish.