Scan barcode
teokajlibroj's review
5.0
Dawkins is a controversial writer, but here he returns to what he does best, explaining evolution. This is an omnibus collection of all the reasons why evolution is true and told in a positive manner (rather than just showing why creationism is wrong). The book is mostly easy to understand to the lay reader with little scientific knowledge (I'll admit there are one or two tricky chapters). Otherwise a great and informative book.
spamrisk's review
4.0
You know how sometimes you get a feeling, and you can't necessarily back it up by reason or examples, but you just know it's true? This book is written by a British guy who's smarter than you and he lets you know that he's smarter and Britisher. That, however, is not a bad thing. The Greatest Show on Earth is a very good piece that demonstrates some of the more fascinating evidence for evolution. I went into this book as a choir member asking to be preached to, and for the most part, Dawkins delivers full scale.
As a lay person, I was baffled by the parts regarding scientific minutiae (and if I don't get it, chances are creationists won't either). Regardless, there is a lot of great material in the book geared to those of us who aren't as smart or British as Dawkins. I like that Dawkins didn't compromise when writing this book, but it's this lack of compromise for the average punk like myself that will prevent it from reaching the grand audience that it needs to reach.
As a lay person, I was baffled by the parts regarding scientific minutiae (and if I don't get it, chances are creationists won't either). Regardless, there is a lot of great material in the book geared to those of us who aren't as smart or British as Dawkins. I like that Dawkins didn't compromise when writing this book, but it's this lack of compromise for the average punk like myself that will prevent it from reaching the grand audience that it needs to reach.
needagoodbook's review
5.0
Fantastic book! Evolution is incredible and Richard does another excellent job of describing it.
microbiologist's review
5.0
I would give it 10 stars if I could. Truly one of Dawkins best works to date.
cheekylaydee's review
5.0
This is my first Richard Dawkins but already I am loving him! I read "The Origin of Species" not so long ago and that has led me to Richard Dawkins. As much as I love fiction every now and then I read a factual/non fiction book to get the old grey cells working. Dawkins was a great choice. He writes with wit and intelligence about his chosen subject (naturel history and particularly evolution) and with an enthusiasm which is tangible with every tun of the page. What's more his enthusiasm catches and as a reader I'm interested in what he has to say. I feel like I'm gaining a real understanding of the topic and I'm learning something. I liked "The Origin of Species" but in reality I read it beuse I felt it was a rite of passage. Dawkins' enthusiasm has made me see the work in a new light. Any author who can make me feel enthusiastic about something and make me want to learn has got to be good in my book. Dawkins gets a big thumbs up from me and I look forward to reading the rest of what he has to offer :)
cosmith2015's review
3.0
Good:
I enjoyed several of the chapters, in particular the chapter involving islands and why intelligent design doesn't make sense. His writing was eloquent as always and I loved the examples he provided. I like the incorporations of the photos as well.
Bad:
I'm honestly not sure what he was doing with this book. He stated he wanted to lay out the evidence for evolution. It seemed like it was directed towards layman and those whom do not accept evolution. However, I don't think he reached his goal. While he provided some spectacular examples, I felt like he just skimmed the surface. He could've gone into much more detail with the fossils for example. He could have exampled just how difficult it was for fossilization to occur and that we probably won't even have fossils for all the current known species, much less a perfect record for every lineage. He also could've picked a lineage (maybe whales?) and gone further in depth with them, showing the evolution of it.
I was bothered by him calling creationist "history deniers" regardless of how accurate it is. It is an insulting and if I were a creationist trying to learn more about evolution, this would've been off putting and I'm not sure if I would've read the book at all.
I was annoyed by the footnotes he put in for random things. Some were needed, some were just snippets of a song or some random memory.
If I were a "history denier", I'm not sure if I would've been persuaded by his book. I think I would've been like "eh.. well god could've done that."
I enjoyed several of the chapters, in particular the chapter involving islands and why intelligent design doesn't make sense. His writing was eloquent as always and I loved the examples he provided. I like the incorporations of the photos as well.
Bad:
I'm honestly not sure what he was doing with this book. He stated he wanted to lay out the evidence for evolution. It seemed like it was directed towards layman and those whom do not accept evolution. However, I don't think he reached his goal. While he provided some spectacular examples, I felt like he just skimmed the surface. He could've gone into much more detail with the fossils for example. He could have exampled just how difficult it was for fossilization to occur and that we probably won't even have fossils for all the current known species, much less a perfect record for every lineage. He also could've picked a lineage (maybe whales?) and gone further in depth with them, showing the evolution of it.
I was bothered by him calling creationist "history deniers" regardless of how accurate it is. It is an insulting and if I were a creationist trying to learn more about evolution, this would've been off putting and I'm not sure if I would've read the book at all.
I was annoyed by the footnotes he put in for random things. Some were needed, some were just snippets of a song or some random memory.
If I were a "history denier", I'm not sure if I would've been persuaded by his book. I think I would've been like "eh.. well god could've done that."