Theory that \'Celts\' are a myth

[Conal]

I had to explain to her that although they all have the same info there is the matter of interpretation, intentional or uninentional bias, how people cherry pick facts to fit theories unintentionally or intentionally and of course sometimes a need for sensationalism to sell books.

Articles appearing in peer publications are very narrowly focused on a specific question and have to report all possible interpretations. However, these people are human and have their own ideas and with knowledge of other peer publications they can write books with what they see as a 'best fit' for whatever particular model they prefer.

I would assume that if one was using scientific data to hypothesise a new viewpoint/methodology in a popular science book then it would be prudent to get the science peer ratified first.