No, because it is ignorant anti-Roman Catholic kool-aid. And protestant and then anti-clerical political propaganda.
I still self Identify as a Roman Catholic, born, raised and but full of independent thought. I drove the nuns and priests nuts in Catholic school when I started seriously questioning Catholicism and history of the church. A very rosy picture was painted, but I started reading otherwise. Probably the worst thing my parents did those poor nuns and priests was that they let me get an adult library card at the age of 11 so I could go read and explore the adult section of the public library. I was 21 years old when the Internet as we know it was available to everyone, Mosaic browser. So I had my opinions about religion in general made long before the dawn of the fringe internet blogger.
When I get home later tonight I have some real academic sources that contradict your findings from your one book, I see that it is written by a scholar but it is still "popular" literature, I see that the reviews also tend to be skewed by folks who want to see their religion. AKA, wouldn't stand up as a source in a bibliography on a research paper.
The part of the atheist reviewer that bothers me that makes his review of the book, very skewed is
Medieval science and technology to bring the recent research on the subject to a more general audience and to counter the biased myths about it being a Dark Age of irrational superstition. Thankfully I can now cross that off my to do list, because Hannam's superb book has done the job for me and in fine style.
His method of research is that he is just only going to find facts that support what he wants to believe and not look for facts that contradict what he believes.