My contention with this book is worth a full length rebuttal.

But, I guess the whole thing falls apart for me because of the premise.

I do not believe this world is governed by chance.

This book assumes that this world is evolved from “chaos, complexity, and probability”.

If you assume probability governs this universe, then you might not find it weird to predict doomsday based on probability.

Since I assume creation and purpose, I have no confidence in this probability argument.

Neither the authors case or mine is definitively provable without more information.

My other strong complaint, is this book was written at the end of the fashion of chaos/complexity theories. Older readers will remember these special words being injected into many academic works, for almost no discernible reason.

This book spends a lot of time attempting to establish “increasing complexity” with increased probability of disaster.

This case was not made. These words in my opinion are just added in to make the theory seem smarter or more complete.

To me it’s just annoying to connect fashionable academic concepts to a rather straight-forward predictive text. To me it means the author is less sure of their theory, if they have to dress it up all pretty.

A good theory can be explained with 4 letter words. This quite long book totally failed in my opinion.

Do not recommend reading this book or fearing the end of the world.