I'm pretty sure from the summary that I will agree with Ellis' characterization as quoted in Wikipedia: "Ellis concludes that he writes this review "not with relish at wielding the axe, but with a sense of painful duty. The duty involved is to warn other people of just how bad and dangerous this book is.""

The specific critiques made by Ellis are almost exactly of the sort that, if true, would leave me profoundly disappointed by the book.

Anyway, the point remains that you're failing to engage with the scientific account in a meaningful way, so it's unsurprising that you don't get anything out of it.