| Why Evolution Is True |  | Author: Jerry A. Coyne
Publisher: Penguin (Non-Classics)
Category: Book
List Price: $16.00
Buy New: $8.95
as of 3/18/2010 01:56 CDT details
New (32) Used (5) from $8.95
Seller: zp_books
Rating:  107 reviews
Sales Rank: 5,325
Media: Paperback
Edition: Reprint
Pages: 304
Number Of Items: 1
Shipping Weight (lbs): 0.6
Dimensions (in): 8.4 x 5.4 x 0.8
ISBN: 0143116649
Dewey Decimal Number: 576.8
EAN: 9780143116646
Publication Date: January 26, 2010
Availability: Usually ships in 1-2 business days
| |
| Features:
| • | ISBN13: 9780143116646 | | • | Condition: NEW | | • | Notes: Brand New from Publisher. No Remainder Mark. |
|
| Also Available In:
|
| Similar Items:
| |
| Editorial Reviews:
Product Description
"Coyne's knowledge of evolutionary biology is prodigious, his deployment of it as masterful as his touch is light." -Richard Dawkins
In the current debate about creationism and intelligent design, there is an element of the controversy that is rarely mentioned-the evidence. Yet the proof of evolution by natural selection is vast, varied, and magnificent. In this succinct and accessible summary of the facts supporting the theory of natural selection, Jerry A. Coyne dispels common misunderstandings and fears about evolution and clearly confirms the scientific truth that supports this amazing process of change. Weaving together the many threads of modern work in genetics, paleontology, geology, molecular biology, and anatomy that demonstrate the "indelible stamp" of the processes first proposed by Darwin, Why Evolution Is True does not aim to prove creationism wrong. Rather, by using irrefutable evidence, it sets out to prove evolution right.
|
| Customer Reviews:
Showing reviews 1-5 of 107
 A valiant attempt. March 7, 2010
Bruce David (Sacramento, CA USA)
4 out of 14 found this review helpful
It is obvious from the title of this book that unlike most scientific books aimed at the lay reader, it is an attempt to persuade rather than an attempt to explain. And it is apparent from the very first chapter that this book is an example of rhetoric and not science. It is replete with rhetorical devices: straw man arguments, appeals to authority, cherry picking the data, ignoring counterarguments, begging the question, and outright untruth. Unlike books that attempt to explain, for example, modern physics to the lay reader, this one is trying to convince you.
Coyne's first chapter, titled "What Is Evolution?", begins not with an explanation of what evolution is, as you might expect, but rather with a discussion of the proposition that nature in general and living organisms in particular were designed. This is because his most pervasive rhetorical device is to first convince the reader that there are only two possibilities--either nature was designed, or evolution (and by this he means the neo-Darwinian synthesis) is true, and then to convince the reader that design is false, thus demonstrating that evolution is true. This pattern of argument is repeated over and over throughout the book. Science books on other topics do not do this. You don't find books on Relativity explaining that Relativity is true by arguing that Newtonian mechanics is false. They just lay out the evidence for Relativity and how the theory was derived from that data.
So why does the author find it necessary to resort to this device? Quite simply because there is no direct evidence for the truth of the theory. Proponents of Darwinism are fond of declaring that evolution is a fact as much as gravity is a fact. Yet we experience the effects of gravity every day of our lives. No one has ever seen Darwinian mechanisms (mutation and natural selection) produce a single novel macro evolutionary feature. It has never been observed in nature nor in the laboratory, a fact which Coyne predictably does not mention. (A macro evolutionary feature is a new body plan, organ, organ system, or a complex process such as blood clotting or insect metamorphosis.) Micro evolutionary features are minor changes to a species due to mutations of their genomes followed by natural selection, for example insects developing resistance to a pesticide. The central claim of Darwinism is that series of micro evolutionary changes can and have produced all of the macro evolutionary changes we observe in living systems and the fossil record. It is this claim that remains unsubstantiated. If there were any direct evidence for it, Coyne would certainly have included it.
There are two versions of his argument that some feature or phenomenon could not have been designed, namely 1) "A creator wouldn't have done it that way.", and 2) "This is bad design." Coyne always assumes that he knows what the creator of life would or would not have done, based on his assumption that said creator is God, even though he doesn't believe that a deity exists. This is not a scientific argument; it is a theological one, and not a very good one, at that. The second version of the argument ("This is bad design.") is subject to a fatal flaw, namely, that one cannot know whether something is good or bad design without knowing the purpose for which it was created. The Toyota Prius, for example, is bad design if its purpose is to be a car that has power to spare for passing on a hill, or a car with lots of room for cargo. On the other hand, if its purpose is to be a fuel efficient vehicle, then it is quite a good design. Coyne points to the human body as an example of bad design because it is susceptible to many ailments. But what if its design was part of an overall plan in which souls get born into bodies to experience challenges of various kinds, including physical ailments, for the purpose of spiritual growth? In that case, the human body could be quite well designed. (I'm not arguing that this is true, by the way, I am arguing that Coyne simply has no basis for concluding that organisms are or are not well designed.)
Another rhetorical device he uses is to allude to "predictions" that Darwinism supposedly has made that have turned out to be true as evidence for the truth of the theory. There are several things wrong with this argument. First, valid predictions do not necessarily make a theory true. For example, the Ptolemaic theory (geocentrism) accurately predicted the positions of celestial bodies. Yet we now know that it was false, despite its predictive power. Second, as David Berlinski has pointed out, Darwinism really doesn't predict anything. There is no mathematical structure to it that produces specific, measurable predictions like there are in other scientific theories. What's true is that Darwinists make predictions based on their assumption that the theory is true, for example, "Given that evolution is true, we should find such and such in the fossil record, or in the genomes of living organisms." Third, he very much cherry picks the data, since there are many, many predictions that have been made by Darwinists that turned out to be false. (There are Web sites devoted to this subject.)
The book contains a chapter on the fossil record that claims that the fossil record demonstrates the truth of evolution. If by evolution one means that life has increased in complexity and variety over time, then yes, it does. But if by evolution is meant the neo-Darwinian synthesis, then it most certainly does not. As notable a Darwinian light as Stephen Jay Gould, no creationist and certainly no friend of intelligent design (ID), called this "the trade secret of paleontology", and found it to be a sufficiently serious problem that he proposed a significant modification to the Darwinist paradigm to fix it (punctuated equilibrium). However, his theory is not generally accepted. None of Gould's considerations or other scientists' objections to using the fossil record as evidence for evolution is addressed in the book.
Coyne frequently begs the question. That is, he assumes, more or less explicitly, that evolution is true in the process of arguing that it is true. A particularly egregious example of this is in his discussion of vestigial organs. He argues that vestigial organs are evidence for evolution. But what is a vestigial organ? It is an organ that "no longer performs the function for which it evolved." (p. 58) Thus, the very definition of vestigial organ already assumes that evolution is true.
He also presents a number of statements that are not true. (I'll leave it to others to decide whether he was lying or simply ignorant.) For example, he asserts that molecular phylogenies agree with each other and with morphological phylogenies. This assertion was dismantled in Denton's Evolution, a Theory in Crisis, and its falsity has been noted by many others since. He also states that embryos of the various vertebrate phyla start out similar and then diverge. This is likewise false--they start out quite different, become more similar during the middle stages of development, and then diverge, as Jonathan Wells noted in Icons of Evolution. And in the chapter on the evolution of man, he states "Among those reluctant to accept Darwinism, human evolution forms the core of their resistance." (p. 192) This is also false (and supports a major straw man argument, namely that evolution is true because the only and real reason anyone doubts it is that they are unwilling to face the truth about their origins). Prominent proponents of ID have publicly recounted the processes by which they came to doubt the truth of Darwinism. Many of them began as believers in that paradigm, including the proposition that man descended from apes, but were persuaded otherwise not by their reluctance to accept that humans evolved from lower forms, but by the scientific data calling the whole theory into question. This is true of Michael Behe, Steven Meyer, Jonathan Wells, Douglas Axe, David Berlinski, and Geoffry Simmons, among others.
Which brings us to the biggest failure of this book if the author wishes it to be taken seriously as science, and that is that it does not address the many scientific and mathematical challenges to Darwinian theory that currently exist (in contradistinction to, for example, Steven Meyer's Signature in the Cell, which carefully answers the many objections and alternatives to his thesis). It does not attempt to answer Dembski's work in probability theory and the notion of complex, specified information (CSI), nor Denton's seminal Evolution, a Theory in Crisis, nor Michael Behe's treatise on the experimental and observational evidence for the limits of the power of Darwinian mechanisms (The Edge of Evolution), nor Granville Sewell's carefully reasoned mathematical argument that evolution massively violates the Second Law of Thermodynamics, nor Steven Meyer's paper on the Cambrian Explosion. The only exception to this is that he does try to address Behe's notion of irreducible complexity (presented in Darwin's Black Box), although he won't dignify it by referring to it by its proper name (to Darwinists, it seems to be the-theory-which-must-not-be-named). The attempt is pretty lame, however. He misstates Behe's argument and even then gives a completely inadequate response. I don't have the space here to go into the details, so if you are interested, read Darwin's Black Box and then read the section titled "Can Selection Build Complexity?" in Chapt. 5 of Coyne's book.
He has an entire chapter on sexual selection and the relationship of that to evolutionary theory, but he fails to mention the fact that no one has the remotest idea how the process of sexual reproduction could have arisen through Darwinian mechanisms in the first place.
In spite of all this, as rhetoric, the book is actually quite persuasive. I can see how people who do not read it with a critical eye or who are not familiar with the issues in this debate might be convinced. It's also fairly well written. As science, however, it is sadly lacking.
 Essential Reading on this Subject March 4, 2010
Kenny of LA (Los Angeles, USA)
3 out of 3 found this review helpful
"Why Evolution Is True" is a well written, informative, very convincing defense of the truth and accuracy of evolution. The author, Jerry Coyne, does an excellent job of presenting a complex subject in a readable and understandable fashion. The book is filled with innumerable examples, which clarify and support the positions the author has taken.
The book is also quite persuasive of the author's position. Unlike many of the readers, who appear quite educated in this subject, I come to it as a layman, with only a few preconceived notions of the relative strengths of evolution and intelligent design. However, after reading this book, I walk away with the impression that even though we don't yet understand every facet of evolution, we know enough to understand that evolution is fact, supported by a significant level of physical evidence, while intelligent design is speculation, fueled by persons with an agenda.
I was particularly impressed by Coyne's ready willingness to point out the gaps in the scientific knowledge explaining and supporting evolution. To me, his willingness to acknowledge those weaknesses only serve to further strengthen the support that science presents on the truth and accuracy of evolution.
As a lawyer I have become accustomed to reading material intended to convince the reader of the truth and accuracy of the writer's position. But it is rare that I am presented with such an easily understood, plainly written, solidly researched, piece on such a complex and controversial subject. Whichever way you may lean on this subject (or even when there is no leaning), this book appears to be an essential voice in the discussion.
Impressive, for those with an open mind March 1, 2010
Lupus (New Mexico)
2 out of 2 found this review helpful
My comments will be brief, since I read a copy of the book from the local library, and that was a couple of months ago, so it's not completely fresh in my mind. I did find that the author appeared to address the objections of the Creationist crowd, though he was not argumentative or offensive, in my opinion. I think he presented the case for Evolution very convincingly, and it's hard for me to imagine why the Young-Earth people can continue saying that there is widespread scientific controversy surrounding the facts of Evolution. There is no controversy except in the minds of those whose only explanation is by pointing to the two creation texts found in Genesis in the Bible. This kind of explanation of how the universe was created and how man evolved may satisfy those who accept Hebrew myths in place of scientific knowledge, but for most educated people in the 21st century the myths are just that, and have no scientific or real-world value. Let the Creationists come forward with their own scientific explanation for life on our planet before they so readily dismiss the evidence presented in this book. The facts of Evolution seem to be proven by every advancement in scientific knowledge, and the author lists many of these.
Common sense should tell us that there does not have to be a complete fossil record demonstrating the proof of Evolution. Considering the odds against the preservation of fossils, it's remarkable we have the evidence we have (and it is considerable). This author has presented some of the best evidence in a fair and complete manner. I believed in Evolution before I read this book, but its demonstration of the truth of Evolution was very satisfying. This book is a keeper, and well worth reading. Professor Coyne is to be congratulated for the quality of his work.
 "Breathtaking Insanity" February 27, 2010
Richard W. Nelson (California)
1 out of 33 found this review helpful
In The Origin of Species, Darwin poetically envisions evolution as a "Tree of Life"--
"As buds give rise by growth to fresh buds, and these, if vigorous, branch out and overtop on all sides many a feebler branch, so by generation I believe it has been with the great Tree of Life, which fills with its dead and broken branches the crust of the earth, and covers the surface with its ever-branching and beautiful ramifications."
After 150 years since the publication of The Origin of Species, readers were expecting the eminent Jerry Coyne to finally unveil the ultimate Holy Grail of evolution, the "Tree of Life" in the touted definitive publication of Why Evolution is True.
Richard Dawkins endorsed the book by stating, "I once wrote that anybody who didn't believe in evolution must be stupid, insane, or ignorant, and I was then careful to add that ignorance is no crime. I should now update my statement. Anybody who doesn't believe in evolution is stupid, insane, or hasn't read Jerry Coyne. I defy reasonable person to read this marvelous book and still take seriously the breathtaking insanity that is intelligent design `theory' or its cousin, young earth creationism."
Yet, in spite of a century of research in the fossil record, molecular biology, embryology, and genetics, readers were expecting Jerry Coney to deliver on Darwin's dream with a construct of the "Tree of Life" by converging available scientific evidence. But, it is nowhere to be found in Why Evolution is True. How Coyne and Dawkins can even pretend that evolution is true "breathtaking insanity."
Evolution is a theory in crisis. Coyne concedes, "Even many of my fellow biologists are unacquainted with the many lines of evidence for evolution, and most of my university students who supposedly learned evolution in high school, come to my class knowing almost nothing about this central organizing theory of biology."
At the end of Coyne's class, if Coyne teaches from Why Evolution is True, students are likely to be more confused than at the beginning. Here is why: contradictions--even on the topic of the fossil record. Coyne states: "We can show continuous changes within lineages of animals" Then, later contradicts this statement with: "We don't (and can't expect to) have a continuous fossil record of human ancestry."
At no point in the book did Coyne direct the reader to any geological column in the world that best demonstrates the "continuous changes within lineages of animals." Reason--it is a mirage.
Not only are there contradictions, the most glaring problem was the omission to construct a "Tree of Life." After 150 years, scientists expect to have some idea of the evolutionary "Tree of Life" founded on convergence of data from the fossil record, embryology, molecular biology, and genetics. The lack of evidence for Darwin's "slight, successive" evolutionary changes is stunning.
Coyne's statement on the evolution of humans stands to summarize the value of what we know about evolution: "Given all this, we can't expect to find the single particular species that represents the `missing link' between humans and other apes." Evolution remains a theory in crisis.
Why Evolution is True is simply a new demonstration of innocent evolutionary "breathtaking insanity".
Excellent Introduction February 24, 2010
Greg Goebel (Loveland, CO USA)
1 out of 1 found this review helpful
When I picked up this book I wasn't expecting to be particularly impressed. I'm fairly familiar with evo theory -- and at least being above the "Evo 101" level, I wasn't expecting WHY EVOLUTION IS TRUE to tell me anything I didn't know.
I was pleasantly surprised to find this an informative book with a number of topics I wasn't familiar with. It's well-written, clear, to-the-point, with plenty of interesting detail, and by no means overlong. It also avoids getting into the religion wars. Mind you, if someone wants to bash religions, being indifferent I have no reason to object, but it's kind of a tiresome distraction when I'm trying to learn about science, and needs to be discussed someplace else. Anyway, recommended on all counts.
Showing reviews 1-5 of 107
|
|
Email this page to a Friend
Add to your Favorites or Social Bookmark
|
|
|
|
|
| |
