No comments about Bulgaria and Romania Insight Travel Map.

No comments about Romania Travel map by Hema.

No comments about Vrancea Earthquakes: Tectonics, Hazard and Risk Mitigation (Advances in Natural and Technological Hazards Research).

No comments about Romania Superatlas: FBA185.

No comments about Romania Insight Travel Map.

1 comments about Romania Map.

1. This is a clear, comprehensive map. It's written in Romanian. The horseshoe area of mountain ranges is very clearly marked. It's hanging in our kitchen, so my four children can learn all about Romania before we travel there.

No comments about Bucharest Map (City Map).

No comments about Romania (Michelin National Maps).

5 comments about History: Fiction or Science? (Chronology, No. 1).

1. Some people are able to believe in everything what seems to be logic and supported by some equations and statistics.
   
   It is really funny that even the wildest theory will always find its followers.
   
   Russian science has problem with pseudoscientists. For instance: Lysenko, Michurin in the agrobiology and now Famenko in history.
   
   Maybe in the next volumes of his revised version of history he will try to convince us that:
   
   - Jews are the descendants of merchants who did not pay taxes regullary and were expelled from the Novogrod.
   - Ethiopians are the descendants of the miners (that's why they are black) who escaped from the coal mines, which were placed in Ural. But one of them remained in Russia and later he became the gradfather of Alexander Pushkin.
   - Asians are the descendants of peepers or spies (that's why they have eyes with an epicanthic fold) who were unmasked and left Russia.
   
   Because everything can be proved with statistics.



2. It's some writer working under a pseudonym, getting writer-friends to write these horrible, long-winded reviews.



3. HA HA! IS FUNNY BECAUSE IS NOT TRUE! IS ALSO FUNNY BECAUSE PEOPLE SAY IS TRUE!



4. The way Fomenko rips apart consensual history in a very convincing manner has undoubtebly unnerved a few people who see it as their job to defend this history from all challenges to its integrity. Yet their defence of consensual history is unable to deter Fomenko's assaults on it throughout the book, and by the end of it Fomenko has well and truly broken through the walls. Once you have finished reading this book you will no longer look at history the same way again. However i wouldn't say that this book is for the curious reader, instead it is most likely to appeal to the serious history student who is not contented to swallow everything given to him but has an open and investigative mind.



5. Chances are even if you have a Ph.D in Mathematics and or Physics you take you car to a mechanic whose highest level of education is high school. In short, expertise in one field does not equate to expertise in another, if it did historians would be writing papers on String Theory. It should also not surprise that in a time when people get their idea of history from the likes of Dan Brown a book such as this would find a market, like Barnum said, "A sucker is born every minute!"
   
   Now, the author would have one believe those nasty Jesuits cooked up a bogus history of the world and have snookered everyone (but him, it seems the Jesuits are clever, real clever, just not clever enough) for hundreds of years. Boy, people are really stupid, except for our author. It's a good thing he has come along to lift the veil of ignorance from our eyes!
   
   This is what you must believe to take this authors thesis as valid. Myself, just as I'll take my car to a mechanic who knows his trade and pass on the mathematician, I'll get my history from someone who has dedicated his life to it's study.
   
   Also, IMHO the positive reviews are mostly pathetic attempts by friends (perhaps the author himself) to praise the book. Syntax use in many of them indicate English is not the first tongue, it almost sounds like a Russian writing (very well by the way, but certainly no Conrad like command) English.
   
   
   Too bad I can't give negative stars.

5 comments about Romania & Moldova (Lonely Planet Travel Guides).

1. Some of the reviewers here are focusing on tiny problems with what is a changing, tricky country to visit. And missing what is overall a great asset to a trip there. I mean, if you really want to go all the way to Romania to see an excluded copy of a 70s/80s American TV show set, then maybe you really don't need to be traveling all the way to Europe anyway!
   
   I had a great time using this guide through Bucharest, Wallachia and Transylvania. It was all I needed to gauge where to go, where to stay and how to get around. Sure I found a few great restaurants not included here, and disagreed with a review or two, but isn't that the point of traveling on your own?



2. I bought this book in 2007 for my 2008 trip to Romania. I was impressed. I was on this trip with my girlfriend who is a native Romanian and live in Romania. Still, the book showed us stuff she wasn't aware of. And in the cities outside Bucharest the book was really specific and perfect. If you follow what is written in this book, you will enjoy this trip 100% and will be using your time effciently.
   I have to admit, this book saved us when we were stuck in Sibiu trying to figure out how to go to the next city. Also is has very accurate maps..



3. This book was useful information-wise in visiting Bucuresti and Transylvania. However, I found the overall language of the book shallow and subtly pejorative and insulting to the local people of Romania, and I am surprised that Lonely Planet, a respected publisher of worldwide guides, has published this book as is. A big part of traveling is to show respect for the other culture and learn from it (especially spiritually). Obviously a guide also needs to be realistic and show the negative sides as well, but I disagree with the author's subtly suggested attitudes. I realize that there are two authors, I am only referring to the section I used, the one on Bucuresti and Transylvania.
   
   I want to stress that I am NOT Romanian. Suffice it to say that I showed the book to a very educated and well-traveled Romanian friend who was very unhappy with the first random sentence they saw.
   
   In conclusion, Romania is a great place that one should visit, but I wouldn't take this guide...



4. While the books is more like a directory than a guide, I am glad I purchased the Rough Guide to Romania as a backup.
   
   Was extremely disappointed that some guides in Romania, Moldavia in particular, use the Lonely planet name as a certificate or guarantee, to find out that these were extremely unqualified and rude individuals.
   Hint: be skeptical about these tour guides, and check www.tripadvisor.com reviews!
   
   Lately, I have been using the LP + Eyewitnees Travel guides which offer rich photographic material. Sorry no Romania yet.
   
   In this case I would say, buy the Rough Guide + the National Geo Guide and enjoy Romania.



5. I've historically been very disappointed with Lonely Planet. I always go for Rough Guide or Frommers over LP which I find to be bland, non-opinionated and very P.C. My travel partner had already purchased Rough Guide Romania, so I figured a second reference source was needed. I was very surprised with this edition of LP. It was informative, interesting, opinionated, and had a flare that LP never had. I actually liked it better than the Rough Guide.
   Highly recommend it.