Scan barcode
bupdaddy's review against another edition
5.0
Although Dawkins doesn't seem to realize that you can't reason someone away from a position they don't hold by reason, so trying to arm people to counter the arguments of evolution 'skeptics' is a futile endeavor; however, getting a lot of the gaps filled in about evolution is a fascinating subject for us dilettantes who accept that science isn't intentionally lying to us and are interested in how the accepted science came to be accepted.
Yes, those are ironic quotes around the word skeptics, because metaphorically waving ones hands and repeating nuh-uh isn't really skepticism, it's willful ignorance.
So, sure, one may hear from science deniers that evolution isn't science because you can't test it in a lab. People that claim that are both wrong about the necessity of a lab to test a hypothesis, and the claim that evolution hasn't been tested in a lab. There are experiments where evolution has been demonstrated in a lab - bacteria that have multiple generations in a day, so that evolutionary timelines are years instead of millennia. And the bacteria adapt. Is this good to read about because it will help you convince somebody who's invested in not believing evolution? Of course not. You can't change anybody's mind. Only they can, and if they've predetermined they won't change their mind you're wasting your time. But it's cool as heck. The experiment, that is. And Dawkins explains it, perfectly striking the balance between making it accessible to the layperson, without leaving out substance.
Is the anecdote wherein a denier, who couldn't accept that random mutations could advance from a single cell to a complete human, with a nervous system, miles of blood vessels, sight, hearing, etc., might arise in billions of years, was confronted with the observation that she accomplished it herself in nine months, going to even begin to sway someone who's dug in their heels? Duh no. But the chapter about how we're metaphorical origami rather than constructions from blueprints elucidates so much, and makes the observations that humans have gills early in embryonic development, as birds have teeth and bony tails, make sense. These aren't flukes, they're expected observations of undesigned results of millions of random prototypes.
So, please don't tell Dawkins I said this, because I hate to crush a dream, but the book works for unintended reasons. It's a great survey course in evolution. It cannot work to sway your extended family at Thanksgiving because they aren't genuinely interested in allowing their minds to be changed. And one thing dumb ol' evolution hasn't accomplished yet is allowing objective evidence to force someone to change their minds. Apparently there's no competitive advantage in it.
Yes, those are ironic quotes around the word skeptics, because metaphorically waving ones hands and repeating nuh-uh isn't really skepticism, it's willful ignorance.
So, sure, one may hear from science deniers that evolution isn't science because you can't test it in a lab. People that claim that are both wrong about the necessity of a lab to test a hypothesis, and the claim that evolution hasn't been tested in a lab. There are experiments where evolution has been demonstrated in a lab - bacteria that have multiple generations in a day, so that evolutionary timelines are years instead of millennia. And the bacteria adapt. Is this good to read about because it will help you convince somebody who's invested in not believing evolution? Of course not. You can't change anybody's mind. Only they can, and if they've predetermined they won't change their mind you're wasting your time. But it's cool as heck. The experiment, that is. And Dawkins explains it, perfectly striking the balance between making it accessible to the layperson, without leaving out substance.
Is the anecdote wherein a denier, who couldn't accept that random mutations could advance from a single cell to a complete human, with a nervous system, miles of blood vessels, sight, hearing, etc., might arise in billions of years, was confronted with the observation that she accomplished it herself in nine months, going to even begin to sway someone who's dug in their heels? Duh no. But the chapter about how we're metaphorical origami rather than constructions from blueprints elucidates so much, and makes the observations that humans have gills early in embryonic development, as birds have teeth and bony tails, make sense. These aren't flukes, they're expected observations of undesigned results of millions of random prototypes.
So, please don't tell Dawkins I said this, because I hate to crush a dream, but the book works for unintended reasons. It's a great survey course in evolution. It cannot work to sway your extended family at Thanksgiving because they aren't genuinely interested in allowing their minds to be changed. And one thing dumb ol' evolution hasn't accomplished yet is allowing objective evidence to force someone to change their minds. Apparently there's no competitive advantage in it.
sleepylizard's review against another edition
4.0
It's a collection of all the evidence ever for evolution, and it's super informative. My only gripe is that it's written to be addressed to people who deny evolution, yet he spends a lot of time poo-pooing religion and being very vindictive against anyone who could possibly not believe in evolution. I get why, given the evidence he produces, but it seems a bit childish and it's boring to read.
essieruth's review against another edition
4.0
another elegantly argued, engagingly presented, and compellingly readable book by dawkins. i thoroughly enjoyed the way he argued for evolution, with interesting examples, and accessible scientific explanations. highly recommended!
mariusmasalar's review against another edition
3.0
This is a challenging book to assess. My first question, upon finishing it, is "who is this for?"
The science is too involved for a scientifically illiterate fundamentalist creationist audience, the sardonic tone likewise off-putting to them, and the atheists like me who share his broad perspective hardly need a hand-held walk through the garden of nature's wonders and weirdnesses.
Then again, maybe we do: it should be emphasised that this book makes for a fantastic full spectrum look at the subject of evolutionary theory, one complete with some excellent analogies, stunning facts, and wise correlations. Anyone with a high school level understanding of biology will be more than equipped to follow along and learn.
Unfortunately, Dawkins' extensive expertise in the subject matter often falls prey to his fairly direct sense of humour, expressed via a mocking tone that does more to further the stereotype of him as a shrill British ponce than to reveal his truer nature as a passionate humanist.
Inevitably, I am drawn to wonder what the inimitable Christopher Hitchens would have done with a similar task, equipped with Dawkins' subject expertise. I suspect his subtler wit, fantastically evocative writing, and sophisticated understanding of debate would have produced a finer work.
Nevertheless, I would not hesitate to recommend The Greatest Show On Earth to anyone who seeks a peerless introduction to the current state of evolutionary theory, or to a thicker-skinned creationist seeking to inform themselves about the opposing side in the debate about the origins of life.
mariusmasalar's review against another edition
3.0
This is a challenging book to assess. My first question, upon finishing it, is "who is this for?"
The science is too involved for a scientifically illiterate fundamentalist creationist audience, the sardonic tone likewise off-putting to them, and the atheists like me who share his broad perspective hardly need a hand-held walk through the garden of nature's wonders and weirdnesses.
Then again, maybe we do: it should be emphasised that this book makes for a fantastic full spectrum look at the subject of evolutionary theory, one complete with some excellent analogies, stunning facts, and wise correlations. Anyone with a high school level understanding of biology will be more than equipped to follow along and learn.
Unfortunately, Dawkins' extensive expertise in the subject matter often falls prey to his fairly direct sense of humour, expressed via a mocking tone that does more to further the stereotype of him as a shrill British ponce than to reveal his truer nature as a passionate humanist.
Inevitably, I am drawn to wonder what the inimitable Christopher Hitchens would have done with a similar task, equipped with Dawkins' subject expertise. I suspect his subtler wit, fantastically evocative writing, and sophisticated understanding of debate would have produced a finer work.
Nevertheless, I would not hesitate to recommend The Greatest Show On Earth to anyone who seeks a peerless introduction to the current state of evolutionary theory, or to a thicker-skinned creationist seeking to inform themselves about the opposing side in the debate about the origins of life.
The science is too involved for a scientifically illiterate fundamentalist creationist audience, the sardonic tone likewise off-putting to them, and the atheists like me who share his broad perspective hardly need a hand-held walk through the garden of nature's wonders and weirdnesses.
Then again, maybe we do: it should be emphasised that this book makes for a fantastic full spectrum look at the subject of evolutionary theory, one complete with some excellent analogies, stunning facts, and wise correlations. Anyone with a high school level understanding of biology will be more than equipped to follow along and learn.
Unfortunately, Dawkins' extensive expertise in the subject matter often falls prey to his fairly direct sense of humour, expressed via a mocking tone that does more to further the stereotype of him as a shrill British ponce than to reveal his truer nature as a passionate humanist.
Inevitably, I am drawn to wonder what the inimitable Christopher Hitchens would have done with a similar task, equipped with Dawkins' subject expertise. I suspect his subtler wit, fantastically evocative writing, and sophisticated understanding of debate would have produced a finer work.
Nevertheless, I would not hesitate to recommend The Greatest Show On Earth to anyone who seeks a peerless introduction to the current state of evolutionary theory, or to a thicker-skinned creationist seeking to inform themselves about the opposing side in the debate about the origins of life.
remlezar's review against another edition
4.0
Most of Dawkins' anger has seemed to have subsided after finally getting "The God Delusion" out of his system, and what remains is a great book on the evidence for evolution. Unless you're well read on the subject or a biology major (which I guess just means you're well read on evolution by default), you'll learn lots. Like everything Dawkins it's readable and engaging, accomplishing what few science writers other than Sagan have.
If you're even a little bit curious, you should pick this up. It's probably his best work.
If you're even a little bit curious, you should pick this up. It's probably his best work.
_bookmoth's review against another edition
4.0
This book came on my radar thanks to Nightwish's Endless Forms Most Beautiful. Although I needn't to be convinced of evolution, I enjoyed the book as it had some interesting information I was not familiar with. It was also wonderful to listen to the audio book, read by Richard Dawkins himself to get the right intonation and tone at the various ironic and humorist sneers at creationists.