Customer Reviews (1)

Clear, concise, interesting...
The Cell: Evolution of the First Organism by Joseph Panno, Ph.D., offers an excellent, concise and interesting introduction on the cell and its evolution. Panno opens with a brief overview of theories related to life's origin, then moves to prokaryotes and how they laid a foundation for eukaryotes. Next, he offers an examination of the cell cycle, followed by genes, multicellular organisms, and neurons. Panno does a stellar job of communicating a complex subject clearly (better than many texts as I see it) and sans oversimplification. The black-and-white graphics and glossary are exemplary and useful to the student.
This is my first experience with Panno and the publisher Facts On File, Inc. I am most intrigued. Highly recommended.
The book professes to be targeted at high school or first-year biology students. As I see it, those students would be serious. While it may not be enough for someone with a good deal of biology education, it is excellent orientation for newcomers.
Another wonderful book that offers more of a prose take on biology and is very rich in a wholly different way is The Epic History of Biology by Anthony Serafini. ... Read more

Product Description

Customer Reviews (19)

If you want to read lies
then read this book!

I have never ever read something that so twists scripture into saying what they want it to say.I really wanted to like this book, but I have never been so appalled as I was reading this.

Mediocre
A poor attempt to reconcile the author's beliefs with the scientific reality she works with every day. She clings to biblical inerrancy with desperation, despite the realities of the world she professes to study and teach.
Not really worth the read.

Novel and Fruitful Critique of Intelligent Design
Joan Roughgarden, Evolution and Christian Faith (Island Press, 2006).

Joan Roughgarden is an immensely talented and creative Stanford University evolutionary biologist who, like millions of other people, is a practicing Christian. Like many scientists of all faiths, Roughgarden finds God in nature, and rejoices in the diversity, beauty, and charm of the natural world. "We can rejoice as Christians in the ethical meaning behind what evolutionary biologists are increasingly finding. I've be exhilarated by this personal realization, and I hope you will be, too." (p. 5) Roughgarden is most critical of the fundamentalist Christians who see evolution as the enemy of faith, and the "selfish-gene" biologists, who view evolutionary biology as proving the non-existence of God. "I believe scientists need more sympathy and willingness to accommodate people of faith," says Roughgarden, "to offer space for seeing a Christian vision of the world within evolutionary biology and not force people to accept a doctrine of universal selfishness as though established scientific fact." (p. 12)

Roughgarden describes evolution as saying (a) all life belongs to one huge family tree; (b) species change over generations; and (c) animal behavior is more about cooperation helping than competition and conflict. She stresses the harmony of this view with the Christian Bible, noting St. Paul's stress on the sacred significance of the material unity of all life, the absence of anything in the scriptures that denies the mutability of species, and the Christian ethic of community. She closes the book with a passage from Matthew 22: "Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind... That shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets."

One of Roughgarden's aims in this short book is to develop evolutionary theory in a more detailed way than is usually done by those who address the science vs. faith issue. She identifies the central evolutionary dynamic in the phrase "natural breeding leads to an improvement of the stock" (p. 50) She uses the term "natural breeding" rather than Darwin's term "natural selection," because she wants to stress that the process of transmitting genes from one generation to the next is a product of the care of the parents as much as the competition among offspring. Roughgarden explains Fisher's Fundamental Theorem, which she interprets as expressing the basically progressive nature of evolution, as expressing a natural tendency for the improvement of populations over time. Roughgarden does mention the critiques of Fisher's theorem, which she attributes to "biologists skeptical of the idea that evolution has a direction." (p. 51) I find this attribution of philosophical "ulterior motive" to the critics to be an excess of proselytizing zeal that compromises her commitment to science. I do not know if Moran's classic 1964 paper criticizing Fisher was motivated by skepticism or not, but I am sure that Moran was correct and the subsequent efforts of brilliant population biologists in qualifying Fisher's Theorem and setting it right was not motivated by philosophical concerns surrounding the "progressive" nature of evolutionary dynamics. Roughgarden expresses the belief that the exceptions highlighted by the critics rarely occur in nature. I believe she is incorrect in this assessment because of the ubiquity of non-additive genetic interactions. Nevertheless, I would not deny that there is a progressive thrust to natural selection.

Roughgarden is duly critical of the intelligent design movement, on the grounds that intelligent design and evolution are compatible theories: both could be right, both could be wrong, or either one could be right and the other wrong. Because intelligent design does not present any evidence in favor of its theory, and because even if its critique of evolution were correct this would not increase the probability that intelligent design is correct, Roughgarden rejects intelligent design. I find this a very ingenious and attractive treatment of the intelligent design movement.

Of course, Roughgarden does not believe there is any truth to the intelligent design movement's critique of evolution whatsoever, but she presents her own laundry list of critiques of contemporary evolutionary theory, all of which are interesting and possibly valid. Her general problem (see Chapter 9) is that Darwinian evolution overemphasizes the "individual" and "competition" and underemphasizes the "community" and "cooperation." This critique does not ring true to me. I learned evolutionary theory when I was already a seasoned social scientist, and saw immediately that it provided the tools for understanding both human cooperation and competition. I do not feel that I have ever been misled into a Social Darwinist direction by the careful study of evolutionary biology at all. Of course, my work has been bitterly criticized by the "selfish gene" and "anti-multilevel-selection" school that is the object Roughgarden most serious barbs, but I do not find that evolutionary theory lends any particular support to the position of these critics. I suspect that their criticisms of me, when untrue, are a desperate and almost comical attempt to defend an indefensible biological tradition in which altruism was a dirty word.

Roughgarden also criticizes the standard depiction in evolutionary theory of females as "coy" and highly concerned with the quality of their sexual partners and males as "promiscuous" and concerned only with maximizing their total number of inseminations. Her argument is quite worth reading and she may be correct. But I think she has it mostly wrong.

For most sexually reproducing species in which anisogamy holds (i.e., the female gamete--the egg---is many orders of magnitude larger than the male gamete---the sperm) the cost of gamete production is much lower for males than females, so it is likely that the former will value the number of copulations more than the quality of each mate's gamete contribution. Moreover, in mammals, the extent of female contribution to the offspring is generally much higher than that of the male, so this asymmetry is even more pronounced than in other sexually reproducing classes. Of course, there are several species where the males care for offspring rather than females, but these are almost exclusively in fish, and less often in birds.

As a result of their greater investment in gamete production and offspring care, females look for males with high quality genes, and males attempt to pass themselves off has having high quality genes by hook or by crook. This is an inevitably competitive interaction among males for access tofemales, and involves a conflict of interest between males and females: the female wants the highest quality sperm, and the male (rare cases excepted)is willing to impregnate females independent of the quality of their genes. Roughgarden stresses the cooperative nature of the breeding relationship between male and female once they have mated: they then have a common interest in having their offspring live to reproductive age. However, she undervalues the conflictual character of mate choice. In addition, except is certain species, after impregnation, males do better by abandoning their mates in favor of seeking new mating opportunities rather than participating in raising offspring.

Roughgarden directs her criticism of mating behavior to what is known as "sexual selection" theory, which attempts to account for that fact that males of a species are often highly decorated (Darwin's peacock' tail) by a theory of "runaway selection" of the following form (elaborated upon analytically by Fisher): females come to prefer males with decoration for no fitness-relevant reason, but once this preference exists, it is better to mate with a colorful male because the male offspring will be more colorful and hence have enhanced mating chances, even if the cost of decoration to males is fitness reducing. I have done a fairly thorough study of this phenomenon and as far as I can tell, it does not exist, either in a plausible theory or in empirical observation. Moreover, most population biologists do not believe in runaway sexual selection at all, but rather believe that male decoration is a costly signal of possessing high quality genes. Thus, I do not thing there is much to Roughgarden's critique of sexual selection that we do not already know.

I should add that the general public finds runaway sexual selection extremely attractive, and there are numerous authors who have asserted that humans have this or that characteristic (e.g., musicality and intelligence for males, big breasts and wide hips for females) because of sexual selection. There is little support for such notions in the serious professional literature, and Roughgarden is rightly exasperated with such arguments.

I should also add that the fact that in many species the "coy" female and the "promiscuous" male stereotype is fairly accurate does not mean that it holds for all species. It certainly does not. There has been some attempt to claim that it holds in humans, and to use this difference between human masculinity and femininity to account for the sex differences in human society (especially the fact that women prefer rich and powerful men and men prefer young and nubile women). I do not find this argument at all persuasive. The problem is that there is an equally plausible explanation in terms of patriarchal culture and the remnants thereof. There may of course be differential innate predisposition in men and women concerning nurturance, family values, and the like, but observed difference are most likely do to acculturation and male/female status differences rather than genes. I would not be surprised if it turns out that most male-female behavioral differences in human society are highly attenuated or eliminated in the context of a gender-neutral culture. However, if differences remain, I suspect they will be in conformance with the relative investment in gamete theory which, although of doubtful relevance in today's world, was of prime importance in our evolutionary history.

I think the most valuable aspect of this book is Roughgarden's demonstration, through a sort of low-tech biblical exegesis, that a belief in the teachings of Jesus, as laid out in the New Testament, is not in conflict with evolutionary theory. She throws in for good measure (though limited relevance) that homosexuality, bisexuality, trans/ambiguous gender, and other aspects of modern life that liberate us from gender stereotypes are neither modern, nor prohibited by the Bible, nor absent from the non-human animal world. All that for only $15.00. Pretty hard tobeat.

Gracious, thought provoking, and well worth reading.
Many who don't find their own particular brand of theology or scriptural exegesis reflected as prominently in this book as they would like will rush to criticize it for not being what they would have written.

Nevertheless, this slim, focused book is well worth reading: for anyone with an interest in either Christianity or biological science.

It is a working life-scientist's thoughtful, careful consideration of how the core principles of evolutionary biology and the core truths of Christian faith can not only coexist in the same mind and heart, but actually complement and enrich one another.

It's not to be missed.

A needed presentation
Excellent and honest with plenty of biblical references.

Very well written ... Read more

Product Description
This book uses evolution as the unifying theme to trace the connections between levels of biological complexity from genes through nervous systems, animal societies, and human cultures. It examines the history of evolutionary theory from Darwin to the present, including: the impact of molecular biology and the emergence of evolutionary social theory. ... Read more

Customer Reviews (1)

SUPER!
A fascinating overview of evolution, and of the evolution of human behavior and society in particular. The writing is accessible to everybody, and I highly recommend it to all people regardless of their scientific background. Well-written, with many helpful charts, etc. A real eye-opener! ... Read more

Product Description
Philosophers of science have tended to avoid the problem of "development" by focusing primarily on evolutionary biology and, more recently, on molecular biology and genetics. Jason Scott Robert explores the nature of development as it relates to current concepts in biological theory and practice and analyzes the interrelations between development and evolution (evo-devo), an area of resurgent biological inquiry. ... Read more

Product Description

Customer Reviews (1)

Level: advanced
I came to this book for an introduction to the statistics at the heart of current evolutionary theory. It gave me that, and a whole lot more--a great round up of issues in evolution at the professional level, most of it way over my head. I felt well satisfied that I'd been introduced to modern evolutionary discourse, to how professional evolutionists think about the subject and what issues matter to them. I noticed how little that discourse connects to the roots of evolutionary theory in the 19th C. Discussion of basics went back no further than the 1920s and '30s. My overriding impression was that professional evolutionists no longer have a language in which to talk to laypeople about lay interests. I recommend that, if you want to argue with evolutionists about something, you read this book first and see if your "something" can be framed in their discourse. If not, you may be met with an expression ofwell-meaning puzzlement--"what are you talking about?". Well-written, easy to read, except for the inscrutability of the subject matter itself, which I ultimately found just uninteresting. ... Read more

Product Description
How should the concept of evidence be understood? And how does the concept of evidence apply to the controversy about creationism as well as to work in evolutionary biology about natural selection and common ancestry? In this rich and wide-ranging book, Elliott Sober investigates general questions about probability and evidence and shows how the answers he develops to those questions apply to the specifics of evolutionary biology. Drawing on a set of fascinating examples, he analyzes whether claims about intelligent design are untestable; whether they are discredited by the fact that many adaptations are imperfect; how evidence bears on whether present species trace back to common ancestors; how hypotheses about natural selection can be tested, and many other issues. His book will interest all readers who want to understand philosophical questions about evidence and evolution, as they arise both in Darwin's work and in contemporary biological research. ... Read more

Customer Reviews (3)

An interesting debate on the philosophical foundations of tests and model choice
Evidence and Evolution: The Logic Behind the Science examines the philosophical foundations of the statistical arguments used to evaluate hypotheses in evolutionary biology, based on simple examples and likelihood ratios. The difficulty with reading the book from my/a statistician's perspective is the reluctance of the author to engage into model building and even less into parameter estimation. The first chapter nonetheless constitutes a splendid coverage of the most common statistical approaches to testing and model comparison, even though the advocation of the Akaike information criterion against Bayesian alternatives is rather forceful. The book also covers an examination of the "intelligent design" arguments against the Darwinian evolution theory, predictably if unnecessarily resorting to Popperian arguments to correctly argue that the creationist perspective fails to predict anything. The following chapters cover the more relevant issues of assessing selection versus drift and of testing for the presence of a common ancestor. While remaining a philosophy treatise, Evidence and Evolution: The Logic Behind the Science is written in a way that is accessible to laymen, if rather unusual from a statistician viewpoint, and the insight about testing issues gained from Evidence and Evolution makes it a worthwhile read. In fact, it is very well-written, with hardly any typo (the unbiasedness property of AIC is stated at the bottom of page 101 with the expectation symbol E on the wrong side of the equation, Figure 3.8c is used instead of Figure 3.7c on page 204, Figure 4.7 is used instead of Figure 4.8 on page 293, Simon Tavaré's name is always spelled Taveré, vaules rather than values is repeated four times on page 339). The style is sometimes too light and often too verbose, with an abundance of analogies that I regard as sidetracking, but this makes for an easier reading. As detailed in my ([...]) review, I have points of contentions with the philosophical views about testing in Evidence and Evolution: The Logic Behind the Science as well as about the methods exposed therein, but this does not detract from the appeal of reading the book. (The lack of completely worked out statistical hypotheses in realistic settings remains the major issue in my criticism of the book.) While the criticisms of the Bayesian paradigm are often shallow (like the one on page 97 ridiculing Bayesians drawing inference based on a single observation), there is nothing fundamentally wrong with the statistical foundations of the book. I therefore repeat my earlier recommendation in favour of Evidence and Evolution: The Logic Behind the Science, Chapters 1 and (paradoxically) 5 being the easier entries. Obviously, readers familiar with Sober's earlier papers and books will most likely find a huge overlap with those but others will gather Sober's viewpoints on the notion of testing hypotheses in a (mostly) unified perspective.

Excellent book for the layperson.
This book is not all that technical.It provides lots of easy-to-understand examples and analogies to help the uninformed reader grasp the arguments presented.

A Technical Jungle
This is a very technical book on the application of various theories of probabilities (Bayesian, likelihood theory etc) in respect of the claims of "Intelligent Design" and the theory of evolution. It is a matter of academic interest whether Elliot Sober's arguments are correct because they are couched in the technical language of symbolic logic. Insofar as one can understand the general drift, he appears to have shown that the Intelligent Design argument is founded on very weak evidence (including evidence to even support the theory). Sober then tried to apply the same formula in respect of evidence concerning the theory of evolution (and natural selection) and concluded, through a series of logical exercises, that the evidence may not be as conclusive as the evolutionary scientists would like us to believe. One of the main theses of Elliot Sober in this book is that there are many ways of ascertaining truth. He thinks that just because Intelligent Design is a flawed hypothesis does not mean that the existence of God has not been proved. But similarly, even if evolutionary theory is flawed (as Sober tires to show) it does not mean that God, therefore, exists. The existence or otherwise of a theistic being is a matter that is examined from many more viewpoints than just the evolutionary theory. I think that unless you are interested in formal logic, and want to test Sober's technical declarations and exercises, you may find this a difficult book to grind through. ... Read more

Product Description
Does life (for the living) differ from that of the non-living? If so, how? And how, in that case, does biology as the study of living things differ from other sciences? These questions are examined through an exploration of episodes in the history of biology and philosophy. ... Read more

Customer Reviews (1)

Excellent book at an excellent price
Having just come upon the work of the first writer, I was gratified to be able to obtain this important book quickly and at a very low price. Kudos! ... Read more

Product Description
Published to coincide with the 150th anniversary of On the Origin of Species and the 200th anniversary of Darwin's birth, Evolution Revolution reveals the story behind "the greatest idea in history." Following in the footsteps of What Makes Me Me?, Go Figure!, and Can You Feel the Force?, this book answers questions such as "why do tigers have stripes?" with entertaining text, full-color photographs, and the boldness and innovation that define this groundbreaking series. ... Read more

Customer Reviews (3)

Evolution Revolution
It has got amazing information that I have not found that were put together in another book.

HIGHLY recommended for young scientists everywhere!
As a free-thinking mom, I was thrilled to find this book for my young sons (first & third grade).It is a fantastic journey through time and thought. The colorful images kept them pouring over the pages and the reading was fairly easy for my third grader. The book reads well straight through, but is also sorted into small sections for quick reads.

I only wish books like this had been available to me when I was a child.

This utterly amazing book will entrance even the most reluctant reader!
Civilizations have long pondered our very existence, have had theories and an assortment of "creation stories" to explain where we came from, and have often wondered how we began and evolved into what we are today.Aborigines, Greeks, Hindus, Pacific islanders, Native Americans and Christian peoples all had their tales and myths to pass along to the next generation.The debate of "you're wrong and I'm right" will continue for as long as we are on this Earth.Charles Darwin and his Theory of Natural Selection and the resulting publication of the Origin of Species blew many previous theories out of the water.

In this magnificent book you'll have the opportunity to explore "evolutionary science" in a way you've quite not experienced before.This book is so vibrant you won't quite know where to begin.Each page is a mishmash of factual material presented in many different ways.You can read it partly as a graphic novel and wend your way through short paragraphs of information.There are even several small experiments or projects you can do, including one where you can actually extract and take a look at your own DNA.Did you know that "if all the froglets survived, the world would be knee-deep in frogs withing 10 years?"

This is an utterly amazing book that will, on many levels, entrance the reader.The pages are so busy and visually exciting it is difficult to know where to begin on each one.There is everything a student would ever want to know about evolutionary science in this book.There are photographs, illustrations, a time line, maps, a glossary and an index.Even the most reluctant reader will be willing to spend hours poring over this material.Did you know that Alfred Russel Wallace, a young man Darwin corresponded with, came to the same conclusion concerning natural selection?If not, you may be in for a few surprises in this book! ... Read more

Product Description

Customer Reviews (1)

Great Book
Sorry that my review is so small.This is a great book about the dichotomy of genes and environment and how there is no real line dividing the 2.It speaks of some of the misconceptions that way of thinking produces.It also discusses some of the common metaphors that have been used in the past relating genes to "blue prints" and the such and how these metaphors should be gotton rid of.The ingredients that go into an oransismand inheritance are many which includes genes, atmosphere, culture, and many more that she discuses.All are important in the construction of an organism and none are more important then any other.She also discuses the silliness of the nature nurture debate.I think this book and way of thinking is very important for science, social sciences and just the everyday [mis]conceptions most people in the western world have of the dualism of genetics and environment. ... Read more

Product Description

Customer Reviews (2)

Rarely Does Art Serve Nature So Beautifully
'Evidence of Evolution' advances the "coffee table book" several generations in both intelligence and design.The art work photography is stunning; the text is captivating.Here is earth's life story, from newborn sea horse to prehistoric tortoise, written in prose both factually accurate and crystal clear, without ever being dull.Finally, a serious science book created to educate and charm the general reader.A timely salute to the 150th anniversary of Charles Darwin's seminal, On the Origin of the Species, 'Evidence of Evolution' is the ideal gift book for any occasion. -- Edward Hannibal, novelist.

Exquisite, informative, haunting
Images far more emotional than specimen photographs...ideas far deeper than explanatory captions: this is an exquisite collection of photos and mini-essays that evokes wonder at the complexity and strangeness and sheer randomness of the natural world. The book works at several levels: as a handsome "coffee-table" book (yikes, but it could suffice if you just want to look at beautifully composed images); as a very informative and accessible read on Darwin's ideas and their physical manifestation in nature; and as an ongoing dialogue between a photographer and a writer, each using her particular medium powerfully to convey something splendid to the other, and vicariously to us as the lucky eavesdroppers. ... Read more

Product Description
From Darwin onward, it has been second nature for evolutionary biologists to think comparatively, because comparisons establish the generality of evolutionary phenomena. Do large genomes slow down development? What lifestyles select for large brains? Are extinction rates related to body size? These are all questions for the comparative method, and this book is about how such questions can be answered. It examines how the comparative method complements other approaches, identifies the biological causes of similarity among species, and discusses methods for reconstructing phylogenetic trees, along with many other topics. The book will interest all students, professionals, and researchers in evolutionary biology, ecology, genetics and related fields. ... Read more

Product Description

Customer Reviews (2)

That's good book !!
This book is the best in Mathematical Modeling tha I read.
It's a good educational book.

Very good on stability analysis
Although other books may have a better presentation of the models' use and context, this is the best presentation I have seen on stability analysis, plus it presents a good quantity of model examples. The presentation of the math used is ample and clear. I highly reccomend it. ... Read more

Product Description
This captivating book written by the author of the bestsellers: "Dinosaurs: Those Terrible Lizards" and "Evolution: The Fossils Say No!" contains all the information in the latter plus it gives up-to-date information on the fossil record to challenge the evolution theory. --- from book's back cover ... Read more

Customer Reviews (65)

Balderdash
If you really think the invisible man in the sky invented the world 6000 years ago or so, this will reinforce your dogmatic world view. If you want the science look elsewhere.

Evolution is TRUE no matter WHAT you say!
I am not a biologist, but I have a degree and am a fairly well read guy. I found this book quite invigorating and accessible to non-scientists such as myself. One of the most striking things I have discovered about the vehement critiques of this book both at the Amazon website is the alarming degree of hatred and resentment that has been displayed by Gish's fellow scientists. Now, whether Gish is right or wrong is beside the point when one just considers how his attackers have chosen to respond to his book; using mere ad hominum tactics does not instill in me a sense of confidence in Gish's adversaries' actually knowing what they are talking about. After all, when one feels compelled to do nothing more than hurl insults at the author of a book instead of actually taking the time to engage the argument of the book, that tells me that the critic has an insecurity complex. And that is precisely what the majority of Gish's peers have done; they have basically said "How DARE he challenge Darwinian natural selection? " As the late Carl Sagan said so vociferously so many times, science is SUPPOSED to be an OPEN FORUM for discussion. No matter how smart a person is or what his or her credentials are, no one view is supposed to be categorically accepted or categorically rejected without due process. Categorically rejecting Gish's theory and trying to attack him personally tells me just how little so many of these "professional"scientists actually know about science.

Recently I read a critique about Michael Behe's book, who wrote about the Wistar Institute.

It addresses all of the reviewers who complained that Gish did not present his case to his scientific colleagues but instead wrote a book for the general public & thereby bypassed his colleagues. Well, I have a question for you: how many of you Darwinists have heard of the Wistar Institute? I would imagine very few. I have read about it elsewhere in other books & have always found it curious that so few people are aware of this discussion from the late 1960s. What Wistar was was a forum that put together many of the world's best biologists together with the world's best mathmaticians. It was designed to prove the mathmatcial validity of Darwinian natural selection. It was, however, a complete distaster. The odds proved so enormous that Darwinism seemed to be mathmatically impossible. Wistar was thereby shoved into the closet & hidden because it was an embarrasment to the Darwinists. Now, I ask the question: was Wistar bad science(like so many evolutionists have called Gish's book?). If so, WHY? One thing is for certain; nobody can accuse the scientists involved in Wistar to be Creationists - they were atheists to a last man, for heaven's sake. It was most definetly not a conspiracy in which the outcome was jury-rigged. Now, for all I know, some reason may preclude mathmatics from being a reliable tool to use in discussions of Darwinian natural selection. But if so, it must be PROVED thus. To date, all I have read of this critique of Darwinism have been strawman arguments that state that: well, just because it is highly improbable does not mean it can't happen by chance. After all, what are the odds of getting a winning hand in a poker game? Arguments like these (most famously instituted by pro-Darwinians such as Doolittle) grossly miss the point. The point is not that it is highly improbable but rather that the odds are so astronomical as to make the plausibility impossible. Now, to give an example: according to the laws of quantum mechanics, if all of the atoms on the moon had exactly the same spin at exactly the same second, the moon COULD leave it's orbit from the earth. This is a probabalistic fact. However, the point is, it WON'T. Even though it is mathmatically possible, it is realistically impossible because the moon has too many atoms to make this feat plausible. The same goes for the odds of Darwinian evolution happening just so in the mere 4 & a half billion years (or so) that the earth has been around. Now, I ask the question, yea hardcore Darwinists: why is it that the Wistar Institute does not warrant even so much as a footnote on any collegiate or high school biology text in the world? After all, if it had shown so much as a shred of evidence that Darwinism was mathmatically acceptable, I GUARANTEE you that it would be in EVERY student's biological textbook and would be as familiar to the layman's vocabulary as Einstein's theory of Relativity. Is this not a double-standard? If the scientists at Wistar were wrong (they could have been) then they must be PROVEN wrong. However, after 30 years, as MIT theoretical physicist Gerald Schoeder has attested, the odds have if anything gone UP. I find it rather fascinating that the same neo-Darwinists who find their paradigm so mathematically credible do not stay up at night with dark thoughts about the moon leaving the orbit of the Earth. So, where am I going with this, you ask? Well, this is my point: if the scientific community is and was unwilling to accept the findings of it's own old-boy-club happy-as-can-be atheists, how in the world do you expect them to pay attention to a molecular biologist who dares to mention the dirty G word? I think that Gish deserves some slack on this one. That is, unless you believe in the double-standards that Sagan so vehemently wanted to jettison from the realm of science....

Dear Travis
Einstein's Relativity theories have had so many holes poked in them that they're starting to look like Swiss cheese and we have Quantum Physics to thank for it. Please refrain from putting them in the same context.

Stupid and dishonest, typical for Gish
Gish recently retired, so let's take one last look at one of his most popular books, Evolution? The Fossils Say No! (ETFSN).

Throughout his creationist career, Gish was a prime example of the "lying for Jesus" strategy. ETFSN contains many examples of Gish's legendary dishonesty.

Let's start with Gish's ancient quotes and references.ETFSN, copyright 1995, has over 75 citations and/or quotations from 1970 or earlier!That's pathetic.

It also calls a 31-year old study on radiometric dating "recent."That's blatantly dishonest.

In debates in the '70s and `80s, Gish claimed that the geologic column is based on the assumption of evolution, but in 1982 Chris McGowan challenged him with a geology book written before Darwin had even been born, showing essentially the same geologic column used today.Faced with this evidence, Gish admitted his error and withdrew the argument.So, that seems reasonable.Gish made an innocent mistake, admitted the error, and withdrew the argument.End of story, right?Not quite.Despite having admitted that the argument was wrong, Gish continued using it in subsequent debates and included it again in ETFSN!That's contemptible.

Gish also makes numerous mistakes.For example, he insists that "fully functional" anatomical features, like feathers and wings, can't evolve step by step, and in fact would be completely useless in less than "fully functional" form.But recent fossil discoveries show ancient dinosaurs with very primitive feathers, little more than fuzzy hairs.Later there are dinosaurs with fluffy, not aerodynamic, feathers.Only much later do we finally find fully aerodynamic feathers on reptilian-looking birds.So fossils actually say YES to evolution!

Wings can exist in less than "fully functional" form, too.Richard Dawkins points out that some frogs use webbed feet for gliding, tree-snakes with flattened bodies can maneuver through the air, and some squirrels have flaps along their bodies for gliding.Not only are animals with half a wing common in nature, so are animals with a third of a wing, a fourth of a wing, or even less!

But even more critical than his many mistakes, Gish simply can't be trusted to tell the truth.Richard Trott reports a whole series of falsehoods by Gish during a 1994 talk at Rutgers.For example, Gish stated that there are no fossil precursors to the dinosaur Triceratops.In reality there are well known precursors, Monoclonius and Protoceratops, which appear in proper sequence in the fossil record and show the expected change in body size, number of horns, etc.Gish also indicated that all three ceratopsians were contemporaneous.In reality, Protoceratops came first, followed by Monoclonius, followed by Triceratops.Trott's article exposing Gish's falsehoods prompted a reply from Gish which contained still more dishonest statements!

Joyce Arthur reports another series of Gish falsehoods.In the 1979 version of ETFSN, Gish claimed that Dubois concealed his discovery of Wadjak Man for about 30 years.But in 1982 C. Loring Brace told Gish in a debate that Dubois had actually published, not one, but two reports about Wadjak Man shortly after its discovery.Nevertheless, Gish repeated the same falsehood in Evolution: The Challenge of the Fossil Record (1985) and again in a 1992 debate with Karl Fezer.Fezer even provided Gish with the references for Dubois's publications on Wadjak Man, but Gish repeated the same falsehood yet again in ETFSN. Arthur pointed out Gish's falsehood again in 1996, but Gish repeated it yet again in a 1997 debate.Such blatant, repetitive dishonesty is simply contemptible.

In a 1983 PBS broadcast, Gish dismissed the significance of the similarity of chimp and human proteins, claiming that some bullfrog proteins were more similar to human proteins than chimp proteins were.Asked to identify the specific proteins, Gish promised to do so, claiming that he had them in his records, but he never produced them, including in ETFSN.In fact, there were no such proteins.Gish simply made them up.

Gish has such a poor reputation, that even other creationists frequently just ignore him.For example, in 1985 Gish classified Java Man, Peking Man, and ER 1470 as clearly ape; but in 1992 Lubenow classified all three as clearly human!

Gish recently retired from the ICR, which worked hand in hand with Gish in spreading falsehoods.The ICR promotes and sells Gish's trashy books, including his comic book "Have You Been Brainwashed?" The ICR continued selling the original version for at least nine more years after Gish himself admitted that it contained numerous errors.The ICR is still selling a revised, 1994 version, but even the revised version still contains some of the same errors as the original!So who is brainwashing whom???

These examples (and many others) show how dishonest Gish is and help explain why creationists publish their ideas in oral debates and lectures, or in popular books like ETFSN, not in professional science journals.In debates, if Gish is caught in a falsehood in front of one audience, that doesn't prevent him from repeating the same falsehood in front of other audiences.And in books like ETFSN, Gish knows he can get away with lying, because most creationists aren't likely to check his statements.Such blatant dishonesty can't survive the peer-review process of professional science journals, however, which is why creationists like Gish never publish their creationist trash there.

The book of lies~!
Shame on Gish. He once again throws together a manipulative pack of lies and distortions (and he knows it), with no factual evidence supporting his obsured ideas. I just can't see how this disgusting man still holds any bit of sway with anybody, but then again I've never undergone the misfortune of being brainwashed by a fundie church. Shame on you Gish, SHAME ON YOU~! ... Read more

Product Description

This book provides a comprehensive review of the many interesting statistical problems arising in molecular evolution provided by the leading researchers in the field. It is intended for researchers and students from the statistical and biological science alike. For the statistician the book provides an introduction to an exciting area of application that often has been overlooked by statisticians. For the biologists the book provides an introduction to the theory underlying many of the methods they use in their daily research. Several of the chapters, including the four introductory chapters, are also highly suitable as texts for advanced undergraduate or graduate level courses in molecular evolution.

Customer Reviews (1)

Excelent Reference Book on Molecular Evolution
For those biologist and mathematicians willing to expand their knowledge in Molecular Evolution, this book is the right source. Chapters were written by leading researchers in their fields and are divided in sections from basic concepts to more advanced methods of molecular analysis. Language is clear, topics well organized. I recommend this book to any grad student, post doc or researcher interested in clear, informative reviews in several areas of Molecular Evolution. ... Read more

Product Description

Life on earth is characterized by three striking phenomena that demand explanation: adaptation—the marvelous fit between organism and environment; diversity—the great variety of organisms; and complexity—the enormous intricacy of their internal structure. Natural selection explains adaptation. But what explains diversity and complexity? Daniel W. McShea and Robert N. Brandon argue that there exists in evolution a spontaneous tendency toward increased diversity and complexity, one that acts whether natural selection is present or not. They call this tendency a biological law—the Zero-Force Evolutionary Law, or ZFEL. This law unifies the principles and data of biology under a single framework and invites a reconceptualization of the field of the same sort that Newton’s First Law brought to physics.

Biology’s First Law shows how the ZFEL can be applied to the study of diversity and complexity and examines its wider implications for biology. Intended for evolutionary biologists, paleontologists, and other scientists studying complex systems, and written in a concise and engaging format that speaks to students and interdisciplinary practitioners alike, this book will also find an appreciative audience in the philosophy of science.

Customer Reviews (2)

Statistical issues
I found this book to present an interesting argument, but I was continually bothered by one of their basic conclusions related to the implications of random variation among independent groups.

The authors assert that among two different groups whose components vary randomly and independently from each other, the two groups will be become more and more distinct from each other, on average, over time. I don't believe statistical theory supports this assertion.

For example, two piles of leaves (a favorite analogy of the authors) are 100 ft. apart from each other. Random wind patterns may distribute the leaves in each pile randomly and the variation in the leaf movements are independent between the two piles. Over time, the both piles will be obliterated but if the wind patterns are truly random than the leaves in the first pile will, on average, still be 100 ft. from the leaves in the second pile, on average.

If the authors do not consider average distinctness of one group of leaves or cells from another to be measured in this way, they do not explicitly describe how they would propose to measure it differently. I believe the issue would remain nonetheless.

A Stimulating New Perspective
I.Brief Thoughts

This book posits the "Zero-Force Evolutionary Law", or ZFEL (which the authors suggest pronouncing like "zeffle").The book is not long, but it is dense, and the authors are what an old professor of mine would call "good philosophers" -- they tell you what they are doing as they do it.The lines of reasoning are easy to follow, and examples, objections, and distinctions are offered in due course to make sure readers keep the discussion well sorted in their minds.The ZFEL, briefly put, is a hierachical and probabilistic explanation for the widespread observation that organisms tend to diversify and become more complex over time.The authors argue the ZFEL is the best null hypothesis in biological situations, and they point to a change in how we formulate biological explanation.They discuss both relevant empirical and philosophical points in a wide-ranging but deceptively simple book.


- - - - - - -


II.Further Comment


The ZFEL law is argued to be the fundamental background condition in any biological situation.Considering, as Dobzhansky put it, that nothing in biology makes sense except in the light of evolution, it will come as no surprise that "biology's first law" is an evolutionary law.It may come as a somewhat greater surprise that the ZFEL is distinct from natural selection.The ZFEL, though, is posited in a strongly neo-Darwinian context, and the authors argue strenuously that the ZFEL complements the principle of natural selection.

Here is how the authors articulate the ZFEL:

"In any evolutionary system in which there is variation and heredity, there is a tendency for diversity and complexity to increase, one that is always present but may be opposed or augmented by natural selection, other forces, or constraints acting on diversity and complexity."

The simplest example the authors use is the accumulation of variation on the pickets of a fence.As paint flakes off, lichen appears, etc., the variation is hereditary (retained through time), and so as time progresses the pickets become increasingly different.Importantly, We can say either that the population of pickets becomes more *diverse* or that the fence becomes more *complex*.Typically, we speak of complexity when examining "down" to a smaller scale, such as cellular machinery, whereas we speak of diversity when looking "up" to a wider scale, such as an ecosystem.Both, however, refer to the number of constituents of some entity -- both are hierarchical.And anyone who's ever seen (or made) a phylogeny should recognize that evolution is manifestly hierarchical.

Thus the authors point to evidence for the ZFEL, arguing "[t]he ZFEL is supported by an enormous amount of evidence, at every temporal and physical scale, at every level of organization, across biology."They specify that "[t]wo of the most compelling pieces of evidence" are "the increase in phenotypic diversity over the history of life and the rise in genomic complexity marked by the divergence of pseudogenes."Thus the ZFEL is a formalization of widespread patterns we are all familiar with.The authors argue that the pattern of increasing diversity/complexity is so pervasive that it constitutes the background condition, the null hypothesis of biology.

It is helpful to contrast the zero-force expectation of the ZFEL against the Newtonian zero-force expectation.The nature of inertia dictates that an unperturbed object maintains its trajectory -- that, absent some additional force, an entity at rest remains the same.The ZFEL says that we should expect an entity to be different (or differentiated) at some later time, as a null expectation, in the absence of any intervening forces.

It is also helpful to contrast the ZFEL against a pair of well regarded biological mechanisms: diversifying selection and drift.Both are already recognized as agents that increase diversity/complexity in the biosphere.The ZFEL subsumes these mechanisms with an important hierachical and probabilistic notion of respective randomness.Here is how the authors explain their position:

"Consider this. Take a snapshot of all of the people on a crowded city street corner at some moment in the middle of the day. Then find these same people 10 minutes later. Find them again 20 minutes later, and then 30 minutes later. With the passage of time, they will become increasingly dispersed, or in other words, the variance in their locations will increase. And this is true even if the trajectory of each person is the deterministic outcome of his or her plans for that afternoon. One is on her way to her office. Another is walking his dog. A third is going grocery shopping. And so on. To the extent those motivations and plans are different from and independent of each other, the individuals movements are random with respect to each other. And dispersion at the higher level - the greater variance in location of the group - is the expected outcome of randomness in the with-respect-to sense at the lower level. This is the principle underlying the ZFEL."

The ZFEL turns on this kind of hierarchial, probabilistic thinking.Thus although the ZFEL is a formalization of conventional data, the novelty of the ZFEL is in interpreting biological causation as essentially probabilistic and hierachical.Now, to be sure, biology has long grappled with both hierarchy and probability.But, the traditional norm has been to treat both notions rather differently than the ZFEL suggests.Discerning the novelty in the ZFEL is tricky, because, as the authors note:

"What we have offered here is a standard sort of scientific argument for a theoretical point of view. We have invoked the huge body of data represented by virtually everything we know about macroevolutionary divergence and argued that it best explained by the ZFEL. Further, we have argued that the standard explanations in the field are, implicitly, ZFEL explanations. So even though we are explicitly stating the ZFEL here for the first time, the data pre-exist and strongly support the ZFEL."

So, what is the value of dwelling on the obvious like this?The novelty of the ZFEL is not that it predicts diversification/complexification -- this is already the intuition of everyone from oncologists to ecologists.The novelty is inthe roles of probability and hierarchy in explanation.

Probability is traditionally understood as a tool for verification (the "prob" in the word comes from the same root that gave us words like "prove" and "probity" and "proof").In a complicated world, we can't expect even valid results to be perfectly self-evident, so probabiilty is used to reveal when research results are credible.McShea and Brandon, however, suggest that probability can become the logical basis of biological CAUSATION, like calculus did for classical mechanics.They are not precisely the first to suggest this, and point (for example) to another author's argument that probability is a sufficient explanatory tool for radio-decay.*

Hierarchical scales of biological activity delineate the traditioanl subdisciplines in biology; for example, biochemistry, cell biology, and physiology.Because biologists recognize that different scales are truly different -- there are different types ofdata to collect and different processess to explain -- thepractice is to confine investigation to a single level.Rather less emphasis, however, has been put on the relationship between levels.The ZFEL explicitly states that biological explanation can be INTER-scale, not just INTRA-scale.At a time when interdisciplinary work is coming into its own, the ZFEL might be a helpful guiding tool in what inter-scale relationships investigators could work toward.

Somewhat more abstractly, the ZFEL challenges a person to try a kind of hierarchical thinking that is foreign and yet deeply gratifying to the intuition of anyone familiar with nature.One of the curious things about biota is that we can more fully distinguish two organisms that are more similar.That is, the more similar things are to each other, the more specific we can be about how they are different.If we want to compare toads to (other) frogs, we walk away feeling like we have said something directly relevant to what makes toads toads and frogs frogs.If we want to compare toads to porpoises, we will end up specifying a set of differences and similarities that differs substantially from the toad-frog set (e.g. how many heart chambers, rather than how water-permeable the skin).Comparing toads to sycamores will result in a still-different set of comparisons (e.g. the source of mechanical rigidity).McShea and Brandon recognize this situation in their explanation of how to paramaterize complexity/diversity-- by doing it ad hoc, with whatever characters could be useful for a given comparison -- and they make this situation explanatorily relevant in their formulation of the ZFEL.The slippery nature of inter-taxon comparison is manifestly a hierarchical phenomenon, and it is what makes it impossible to develop a single set of parameters that would describe all organisms fully without redundancy.**

This brings us to the crucial difference between the ZFEL and the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics: entropy can be compared in identical units between any two entities.Colloquially speaking, entropy is everything getting messier, while the ZFEL is everything getting more complicated.As the ZFEL pushes things to become more different, the nature of their difference itself becomes more complicated.This is not the case for entropy.To be sure, the ZFEL complements, rather than contradicts, the law of entropy.McShea and Brandon point to a literature on the relationship between entropy and evolution, citing it as an important influence on their own thinking.For some time, physicists have distinguished dis/organization from entropy.Consider, for example, that before the universe segregated into galaxy clusters, with galaxies of varied structure, with stars having distinct layers, surrounded by distinctly composed planets arrayed in ordered orbits, the rather formless early universe had *lower entropy* than the *highly organized* universe we see now.For me, at least, this situation highlights the weakness of my intuition about what entropy really is.Entropy and organization actually increase together.

If the basic expectation of the ZFEL -- increasing diversity/complexity through time -- is so overwhelmingly confirmed by experience as to be just the status quo recapitulated, the ZFEL's challenge to intuition and the reorientation of causal explanation are so subversive that they might discomfit even ZFEL enthusiasts.I suspect this is what Michael Foote had in mind saying the "ZFEL will be obvious to some, heretical to others" (see editorial review).But I would differ slightly from Foote, as I think it is preciselythose who find the ZFEL self-evident and congruous with their former education who will grapple with its devious truth.



* A bias toward sufficiency over necessity is heresy to many.I suspect Monod would smile.

** Whether nucleotide sequence accomplishes this task is an interesting issue, but space limits. ... Read more

Product Description
This collection of specially commissioned essays puts top scholars head to head to debate the central issues in the lively and fast growing field of philosophy of biology

• Brings together original essays on ten of the most hotly debated questions in philosophy of biology
• Lively head-to-head debate format sharply defines the issues and paves the way for further discussion
• Includes coverage of the new and vital area of evolutionary developmental biology, as well as the concept of a unified species, the role of genes in selection, the differences between micro- and macro-evolution, and much more
• Each section features an introduction to the topic as well as suggestions for further reading
• Offers an accessible overview of this fast-growing and dynamic field, whilst also capturing the imagination of professional philosophers and biologists

Product Description
The way Christ is understood is at the heart of Christian faith and self-understanding. It forms the basis of Christologies that can range from the most traditional, expressing the understanding Christ as both human and divine person, to the most liberal, where Christ is understood as divine inasmuch as he is a man who is perfectly obedient to the will of God. Our images of Christ inevitably bear on the particular culture in which we are situated. So, it is somewhat surprising that the science and religion dialogue has focused most on a doctrine of God, while rarely addressing the figure of Christ.

This book sets out to develop a Christology that is far more conscious of the evolutionary history of humanity and current evolutionary theories about the natural world in general. It argues that one means of developing a Christology that can be informed by such theories is through the concepts of wisdom and wonder. Both have a defined theological role but also act as mediating concepts with science and point to a spirituality that incorporates both science and theology. ... Read more

Customer Reviews (1)

Inspiring, Mind-Bending
This is the first theology text I've read in many years. While the terminology was difficult and I couldn't follow 75% of the author's arguments, it was life-altering to understand that there is a rigorous understanding of Christian faith that includes the feminine (Jesus as an expression of Sophia), and all of nature / cosmos.If you are open to the idea that theology and the theory of evolution need not be in opposition -- indeed, can inform each other, then this is a book for you.

Best aspect: grand sweep of it
Worst aspect: detailed critiques of theologians unknown to this reader. (But then, this is an academic treatise, so it must situate itself within the stream of modern theological discourse). ... Read more

Product Description
Evolution Dialogues, The ... Read more

Customer Reviews (3)

Invaluable for classroom discussion.
THE EVOLUTION DIALOGUES: SCIENCE, CHRISTIANITY, AND THE QUEST FOR UNDERSTANDING is a top pick for college-level collections strong in both science and Christian thinking. Its contrasting chapters and arguments survey the history of Christian belief and thought, Darwin's impact on such beliefs, and Christian worldviews and the science behind evolution. In providing a series of contrasting chapters juxtaposing scientific history and investigation with Christian faith, readers receive a clear set of insights into the major differences between Darwinian theory and Christianity's contentions - invaluable for classroom discussion.

Diane C. Donovan
California Bookwatch

Raves from the Rev.
I read and reviewed this book in preparation for our church's annual celebration of Evolution Sunday, a nationwide movement for the reconciliation of religion and science. Rarely have I encountered such a balanced and readable treatment of what is too often a painful and misunderstood subject. In this book, written for the ordinary reader, both religious and scientific worldviews are spelled out with great compassion and dignity. As the new Episcopal Bishop of California, the Rt. Rev. Marc Handley Andrus said of his study of science, "Wonder called me." Wonder calls us to religion as well. Thank you for this book.

A Balanced, Unbiased Overview of Scientific and Religious Views
The book presents nonjudgmental explanations and examples of both religious and scientific ways of viewing the world. The well-researched, engaging book presents much-needed information via nontechnical language, and is a great help to teachers and students alike in opening dialog between persons with contrasting world views. It defuses debates that have been most likely caused by miscommunication between religion and science. I highly recommend it to all teachers and students of science and theology. ... Read more

Product Description
Ideas about heredity and evolution are undergoing a revolutionary change. New findings in molecular biology challenge the gene-centered version of Darwinian theory according to which adaptation occurs only through natural selection of chance DNA variations. In Evolution in Four Dimensions, Eva Jablonka and Marion Lamb argue that there is more to heredity than genes. They trace four "dimensions" in evolution—four inheritance systems that play a role in evolution: genetic, epigenetic (or non-DNA cellular transmission of traits), behavioral, and symbolic (transmission through language and other forms of symbolic communication). These systems, they argue, can all provide variations on which natural selection can act. Evolution in Four Dimensions offers a richer, more complex view of evolution than the gene-based, one-dimensional view held by many today. The new synthesis advanced by Jablonka and Lamb makes clear that induced and acquired changes also play a role in evolution.

After discussing each of the four inheritance systems in detail, Jablonka and Lamb "put Humpty Dumpty together again" by showing how all of these systems interact. They consider how each may have originated and guided evolutionary history and they discuss the social and philosophical implications of the four-dimensional view of evolution. Each chapter ends with a dialogue in which the authors engage the contrarieties of the fictional (and skeptical) "I.M.," or Ifcha Mistabra—Aramaic for "the opposite conjecture"—refining their arguments against I.M.'s vigorous counterarguments. The lucid and accessible text is accompanied by artist-physician Anna Zeligowski's lively drawings, which humorously and effectively illustrate the authors' points. ... Read more

Customer Reviews (17)

Kindle version review
Buy this wonderful, illuminating work for your e-reader and you will improve it and yourself! You will soon wish that you had all your other great books there as well, available for rereading, scanning and searching at any time. I will not duplicate material in the other, informative reviews, but just want to express surprise that there are not more such works on epigenetic evolution (in all its forms, using "epi" in a broad sense).
I was doubtful at first about the "discussions", expecting quick straw-man knockdowns a la Simplicissimus, but they really add to the exposition. I read it on a Kindle II and only the illustrations suffered, which I figured was OK, as I didn't much care for the style, but on reviewing them on an iPad I found them engaging. Improvements would include links to the notes at the end and return links from there. Some publishers are not fully committed to this e-book thing. Buy the Kindle version for your iPad - it is not (yet?) available as an i-Book.

The noumenal 'dimension'
At a time when Darwinian fundamentalism is almost a church dogma of scientism, this book deftly and cogently shows that the 'post natural selection' era is upon us, with a clear extended framework, its four dimensions of evolution. I think that this extension is, however, completely clear as to the place of epigenetics, but not so clear as to the behavioral and linguistic so-called dimensions. The question of human evolution, and of the evolution of consciousness and of language are not explained, it would seem, in the context of the added two dimensions given in the book, and remain as yet mysterious to science, and perhaps their evolutionary dynamics are beyond simple observation.
We should consider Wallace's insight that man's potential could not have evolved in any simple way, since it has no contact with the environment, as if it were in an extra dimension, perhaps even beyond space and time.
A Kantian framework suggests that the psychology of man/animal confects the space-time categories a priori, suggesting that the mind is in part a higher dimensional, or non-dimensional entity.
The evolution of language, and the consciousness behind, is an entire mystery andb science can't even describe the systems it claims has evolved. The noumenal aspect here becomes, perhaps, dominant.
Naturally scintists always claim to have the explanation of everything. That is hype, and a bluff, not to be taken seriously.

Nontheless, a fascinating, must-read, and a warning the 'natural selection does all' era is over.

Check out also _The Extended Synthesis_, a new book on evolution and the reigning synthesis, to which the authors contribute an essay, next to many others in a coming postdarinism mode, on the manifold dimensions of evolution.

Noone will quite say so, but monolithic Darwinism is kaput.

Thought provoking
A recent biotechnology trade publication wrote that "epigenetic research surges on many fronts", and a study of textbooks in molecular biology that have been published in the last few years reveals that epigenetic mechanisms are relevant in biological systems. This book could be considered a definitive summary of what is known about epigenetic mechanisms in evolution, but also goes beyond it by arguing behavioral and "symbolic" variation also plays a significant role. Readers will get in-depth discussion of these terms and also get exposed to some speculation from the authors on how all four mechanisms, genetic, epigenetic, behavioral, and symbolic drive the evolutionary process. However the authors are careful to note the difference between speculation and facts, and this intellectual honesty is refreshing and motivates the reader to consult some of the many references given in the book. At various places in the book, readers are expected to have a solid background in molecular biology in order to follow the discussion, but non-experts in this field, such as this reviewer, can with some concentrated effort appreciate what the authors are talking about.

Some of the highlights in the book include:
1. The reminder that genes are not "simple causal agents" with traits being the result of interactions among a collection of genes. Along these lines, gene regulatory networks have become a significant area of research in the last few years.
2. The point made that the Darwin theory of natural selection is a general theory of evolution, and does not make specific assumptions on the mechanisms behind heredity or variability. This assertion motivates the reader to search for different representations of Darwinian theory, this book being one of them, and further, ask the question as to how many such representations are possible, given the constraints of observation and experimentation. Are there for example, any "higher dimensional" versions of Darwinian theory (greater than 4)?
3. The discussion on information theory and its use in genetics.
4. The discussion on the ability of genomes to compensate for the lack of activity of a particular gene. This is very relevant to current methods in genetic engineering, which sometimes have their goal the "knockout" of certain genes.
5. The reminder that there is much that is unknown in molecular biology. One example given is the nature of the regulation of splicing.
6. The discussion on the advantages of sexual reproduction versus mere cloning.
7. The discussion on self-sustaining feedback loops in gene activity. This has connections with the field of mathematics called nonlinear dynamics, and a large amount of research in this field is devoted to understanding these feedback loops.
8. The view of the authors that RNA interference is a cellular immune system. This is an interesting idea, and motivates the reader to do further reading on whether it is an idea that is viable in immunology and molecular biology.
9. The discussion on "real-time" genome modification in the Sciara fly, wherein chromosomes are eliminated in both somatic and germ-line cells. The astute reader will naturally wonder how many other biological organisms are able to do this.
10. The role of methylation in transgenic strategies. This discussion is very important to those readers who want to understand the risks involved in genetic engineering. Transgene flow is considered to be a risk by some, but methylation apparently would assist in alleviating this risk.


Some of the disappointments in the book include:
1. The use of thought experiments to argue some of the main points. This is not a major detraction, but this use can degenerate into philosophical speculation if one is not careful, and it seems the authors are aware of this.
2. The authors should have included more discussion on why they think the "four categories" of epigenetic inheritance are not independent.
3. The assertion made without elaboration that when humans imitate they always intend to do so. Along these lines the authors need to elaborate in more detail what they mean by a "modular system of imitative learning." Their thinking on this would be very interesting to those readers involved in the field of artificial intelligence. Indeed, the authors' assertion that "imitation is a context- and content-sensitive process, not mere copying" is very important to those who are attempting to implement cognitive processes in non-human machines. This is further exemplified in the authors' discussion on "radical" evolutionary psychology and its view that the brain is a collection of modules, each having a particular cognitive task. The authors are clearly skeptical about the existence of these modules, and it would be interesting to know whether they would find the concept of "entangled" modules, i.e. those where task sharing is the defining characteristic, useful for their conception of symbolic inheritance systems.
4. Since plants do not exhibit complex or intentional behaviors, the authors need to show why behavioral inheritance systems are not relevant, or weakly so, in the evolutionary biology of plants. This point is naturally made at the place in the book where the authors discuss the difficulties of showing the relevance of behavioral inheritance systems in animals, i.e. showing the existence of animal traditions and so on. This question can also be asked in their discussion on symbolic inheritance systems: plants do not interpret symbols or have symbolic grammars. Here again, the authors point to the absence (or purported absence) of symbolic systems in animals. Humans therefore seem to have a multi-dimensional inheritance system, and are therefore unique in this regard.
5. In their discussion of symbolic inheritance systems, the authors place too much emphasis on generative theories of grammar, and do not take into account other theories, such as cognitive grammar. How would these other theories be integrated into their thinking on the role of symbolic inheritance systems?

More Dynamic, Information-Rich View of Evolution
Jablonka and Lamb pull together many ideas about evolution to suggest that the Modern Synthesis prevalent since the 1930s is due for a reconceptualization. They argue that evolution involves not one but four kinds of inheritance systems: genetic, epigenetic, behavioral, and (in humans) symbolic. Epigenetic systems involve cellular variations appearing in the course of development, so that cells with the same DNA can develop in quite different directions. Since this information is preserved when cells divide, it can also be inherited in the reproduction of unicellular or asexually reproducing multicellular organisms. (Inheritance by sexually reproducing organisms is tricker but also possible.) Behavioral inheritance among organisms occurs through the transfer of behavior-influencing substances and through imitative and non-imitative learning. Human symbolic communication is an especially rich inheritance system, with features such as the capacity to share imagined behaviors never before tried. The genetic and non-genetic inheritance systems work together in evolution, with non-genetic changes often becoming genetically assimilated. For example, if a human population domesticates cows and starts relying on dairy products, genetic variations in the ability to digest lactose become relevant to natural selection, and so gene frequencies can change as a result of the change in customs. Jablonka and Lamb suggest that non-genetic changes often lead the way in animal evolution, with genetic changes playing catch-up.

Not only is this book a far cry from the simplistic genetic determinism that characterizes many popular discussions of evolution, but it is also a departure from 20th-century Darwinian orthodoxy. While genetic changes are usually blind to outcomes, the variations that are transmitted epigenetically, behaviorally or symbolically are often more targeted, arising in responses to signals from the environment. The environment plays the dual role of inducing as well as selecting variations, and the variations are more like educated guesses about what will work than random shots in the dark. The fact that these acquired innovations can be inherited (one way or another, though not by direct modifications of genes) means that evolution is partly Lamarckian after all, at least in a broad sense of the term.

Orthodox Darwinism has always been a philosophically puzzling doctrine. For a theory of change, it has placed a surprising amount of emphasis on the continuity of being, with change appearing as an accident that only occasionally happens to contribute to that continuity. For a theory of information, it has been surprisingly preoccupied with blind, completely uninformed variation. Jablonka and Lamb's understanding of evolution is both more dynamic and informationally richer. Inherited information is no longer confined to the genome, but can include information acquired and used in the course of development. Organisms participate in evolution not just as vehicles for the transmission of fixed information units (genes or their imagined cultural counterparts, memes, a notion J & L critique vigorously), but as active acquirers and interpreters of information. This is consistent with Stuart Kauffman's contention that life is even more complex and creative than biologists have realized.

The book is extremely well written and documented, so that the arguments are easy to follow by readers with a limited background in biology.Highly recommended for biologists and non-biologists alike.

Ways ahead
Jablonka and Lamb have written an impressive, incisive book, with a light touch and an personal approach.They demonstrate ways (genetic, epigenetic, behavioral and symbolic) in which organisms "inherit" from their predecessors. One does not have to agree with all their positions to profit from way they consider general developmental issues.Our culture has taken a step forward through their symbolic creation---it's not the "memes" they provide, but their way of laying the basis for interacting evolutionary processes. ... Read more

Product Description
In this new edition, Brian Charlesworth provides a comprehensive review of the basic mathematical theory of the demography and genetics of age-structured populations.The author aims to avoid complicated mathematics, but gives full derivations of major theoretical results for the edification of the reader. ... Read more