Here's a reason: Based on reading your other posts, I think you may be very surprised and end up liking his writing. Taubes' science writing is the best I've ever encountered. (And no, that's not because it's the only science writing I've ever encountered, not by a long shot.) Whether he ends up right or wrong in the end, you can not accuse him of not having done his homework, especially in GCBC. I won't guarantee it will convince you, but I am asserting to you that you have misjudged him very badly and I have only rarely seen people show their work more thoroughly, and that only in PhD theses. (That said about the depth of GCBC, start with the latest one. It's shorter and sharper.)