Rating: 
Summary: Doesn't make its point. What caused the 'divine spark?'
Review:
There is plenty of evidence for evolution, but without conclusive proof of the 'divine spark' that seperates living cells from the rest of nature, creationism is a better theory than evolution when detailing the beginnings of life on Earth
I was disappointed that Eldredge was writing a political book rather than a purely scientific discussion. Certainly, creationism has been used by various religious and political forces for their own means. But I am looking to read something that conclusively proves one theory or the other, without regards to the politics. The holy grail of evolution studies will be an experiment that replicates the process by which life pulled itself out of the mud. So far, nothing has come close. Until someone is able to honestly replicate this process, the creation theory is just as valid as the evolutionary theory.
-- JJ Timmins
Rating: 
Summary: Evolution explained
Review: An excellent overview of the Evolution/Creation debate. Eldredge first explains what Science is. Then demonstrates why Evolution is true science while Creationism in all its forms (Creation Science, Scientific Creationism, Intelligent Design, etc.) is pseudoscience at best, and buffoonery at it's worst.
It's a fairly short book, 170 pages of main text, with copious notes and references to sources for further reading occupying an additional 44 pages. It should be required reading for all public school board members, and all state and federal legislators.
Rating: 
Summary: Good - To A Point
Review: Being a Christian I read this book with the intention of understanding what evolutionists believe more accurately. The snippets of quotes from creationist literature didn't provide me with enough material in context to understand scientific ideas (I didn't think). I was correct. This book really explained some things to me that I didn't understand before, like how the Linnaean classification system fit within evolution and how punctuated equilibrium was explained. It also gave some answers to the creation scientists' claims (gaps in the fossil record, "kinds" reproducing, etc). This said, I was actually very happy with the book until I came to Chapter 7, "Can We Afford A Culture War". For a paleontologist (who ostensibly is interested only in communicating "good science") to explain the role religions of the world have in saving the environment and how we can all live together in peace and harmony seems to me a bit of a stretch. I think he should have stuck to the subject. The author is rightly disturbed by the way creationists discuss several different fields of specialty during a debate when the scientist on the other side of the issue can only discuss his or her specialty. Of course you wouldn't expect a biologist to discuss the fossil record - that's the job of a paleontologist. Yet this is exactly what the author does in chapter 7 - he plays the role of philosopher and theologian by explaining how outmoded the "narrow minded" evangelical Christians will continue to hold back the "true" religion of the universalist. I would recommend this book to creationists and others sans that last chapter. I also like the new formatting style of leaving a line between paragraphs - much easier on the eyes.
Rating:
Summary: Evolution explained
Review: Eldredge's clear, well-documented, accessible book brilliantly defends evolution as science and attacks the scientific pretensions of "scientific creationism" and "intelligent design." Eldredge (American Museum of Natural History, New York) first discusses the history and significance of the interaction of religion and science, describes science as a way of knowing, and explains evolution's causes (emphasizing punctuated equilibrium more than would some evolutionists). He then exposes the fallacies of various creationist approaches, supporting his arguments with clear examples. He condemns equally those who use religion to limit science and those who use science to discredit religion. He deplores such "culture wars," pleading that science and religion should instead cooperate to deal with the world's ecological crisis. Three useful appendixes include his 1982 essay on the Arkansas "equal-time" trial, an introduction to the National Center for Science Education (NCSE), and a summary from NCSE of relevant court decisions. Despite faulty proofreading and occasional factual errors (e.g., camels are not closely related to horses and rhinos), this is a must read for anyone concerned with the integrity of science education. All levels of readers, including school board members and concerned clergy
Rating: 
Summary: Good Book, Misses Its Target Audience Though
Review: Eldredge's _Triumph of Evolution_ is a good cursory overview of the debate, with a clear bias for why evolutionary science trumps religious myth. The problem with the book is that it completely misses its target audince, a flaw that can be found right in the title. This book isn't very "new" to people already familiar with and supporting of science over myth. Even theists who understand evolution will find a lot of this book "review."
This book should have been written specifically with Young Earth Creationists and their ilk in mind--the very people who believe the Creationists he cites and rebuffs. But the title alone serves as a barrier (it's stand-offish) and the inside tone equally ineffective. So I give it four stars for the effort, but wish Eldredge had thought his audience through a little more.
Rating:
Summary: Disappointing...
Review: Eldridge's book is primarily for the "already converted" (of which I am one) who are convinced that evolution occurred. His book gives a cursory overview of the arguments that creationism uses against evolution, but his book really breaks no new ground in this argument. What he states in this book has been already stated numerous times by other authors. Perhaps it is because there doesn't seem to be any NEW arguments for creationist theory (unless you count Behe's molecular irreducible complexity hypothesis). However, from one of the pre-eminent "deans" of evolutionary theory, I would have thought that he would have given more specifics from the scientific literature, including discoveries of feathered dinosaurs, amphibian transitional fossils with gills AND lungs, and the step-by-step transitions of land mammals to whales. I was hoping for more details about new findings on the lineage of hemoglobin, and the development of the clotting cascade and krebs cycle (of which Behe is so fond of)... Eldridge describes in adequate detail the evolutionary lineage of humans, but most of his rebuttal arguments for evolution and the facts supporting it are are very general. Instead of explaining how isotopic dating works, he merely states in essence that "scientists have done it and it works". When explaining the nuances of horse evolution, he summarizes by telling us that individual species got bigger and some of their toes got smaller. He does not show us... only tells us this happened and then trusts us to believe him and scientific data. Unfortunately, this may not work well in the popular literature. Many other books attacking evolution have relied on statistic after statistic showing the improbability of the origins of life from naturalistic resources, and have drawn on many sources from the scientific literature that supposedly show the validity of their cause. Ultimately, most of their statistics are erroneous, and often their quotes form the literature are out of context. However, the sheer volume of "scientific literature" that they use (if inaccurately) often sways the decision of the reader. Niles Eldridge shows examples where he has been deliberately misquoted by creationists with their own agendas, but without more detailed analyses of data supporting evolution, people may just give up and say "the data support intelligent design" because more hard data, even if erroneous, was offered by creationists. Eldridge's book is well worth reading as an overview of the arguments against creationism, and a primer on the political aspects of creationism. However, more comprehensive scientific data for evolution can be found in "Scientists Confront Creationism" by Godfrey, and "Finding Darwin's God" by Miller.
Rating:
Summary: There is a war
Review: Having read, reviewed and thoroughly enjoyed Niles Eldredge's 'Reinventing Darwin', I was looking forward to his account of the creationism controversy. Although an interesting read, I found unfocused and disappointing. Much of the problem is that Eldredge writes what are in essence several different books. We have discussions of the Scientific Method, primers on evolution, the fossil record, patterns of life and punctuated equilibrium, attacks on young earth creationism, and a reply to Intelligent Design Creationism. All this in a framework (expressed in the introduction and the concluding chapter) claiming that religion, along with science, can solve the great challenge that lays ahead of us - the ecological crises and the threat to biodiversity. Unfortunately, there are much better essays on each of these issues, and that the strength of Eldredge's arguments vary considerably between these issues. After an interesting introduction, Eldredge treats us with a sound but all too brief discussion on scientific methodology. Eldredge explains how in science, we have a hierarchy of ideas - some extremely well established (like the 'fact' that the Earth is round and that life evolved) and some more speculative (like the superstring theory or the age of the universe). Thus the creationist regular chant that evolution is 'just a theory' is meaningless. It is a good discussion, but more sophisticated accounts exist. My personal favorite is chapter four of Alan Sokal and Jean Bricmont's Intellectual Impostures ('Fashionable Nonsense' in the American edition). Chapter three 'The Fossil Record' is probably the dullest chapter in the book. There is very little wrong with the discussion of the evolution of life in it - although it maybe stresses the ideas of Eldredges�s 'Naturalist' school a little too much - but it is not very coherent. Eldredge simply is not the master of prose that Gould and Dawkins are. Chapter four, which deals with Natural selection and punctuated Equilibrium is much better, in part because of its lovely history of evolutionary thought structure, and in part due to the eloquent 'Naturalist' account of evolutionary theory - with all the stress on Punctuated Equilibrium you would expect from its co-creator. Chapter five is an attack on Young Earth Creationism. It deals mostly with Geology, and is both competent and unexceptional. In Chapter Six, Eldredge argues that Creationists are often dishonest, and takes on the Intelligent Design movement headed by Phillip Johnson. For the most part he does a good job. Nonetheless, better criticism of Johnson's concept of 'atheistic materialism' appear in �Tower of Babel: The Evidence against the New Creationism� by Robert T. Pennock. The critique of Michel Behe�s irreducible complexity, while true, is far from thorough (the best review on Behe is an on line article in the Boston Review �Intelligent Design, Again� by H. Allen Orr). Furthermore, on this chapter and on the next one, Eldredge bends over backwards to please the religious, especially Christians. The matter here is the association between evolution and atheism. While anti-evolutionists wish to equate evolution with atheism, biologists like Gould and Eldredge sometimes fall into the opposite trap � pretending that there is no discord between evolution and religion. Actually, while evolution does not disprove Christianity (or religion in general), it certainly poses a challenge to Christianity which Christian apologetics should face if they wish to persuade us that Christianity is true or at least intellectually acceptable. The tendency grows worse. In chapter seven, Eldredge falls deeper into the �bending over� trap. Eldredge claims that he sees a great role for religion in the future � religion is mankind�s tool to fight off the coming ecological crisis. Eldredge thinks that religion mirrors ecology � �religious traditions, especially as embodied in concepts of God, are deeply if not wholly ecological concepts as well� (p. 162). He �demonstrates� this by an argument so thin � using only two examples, one of them from the King James Bible and one from an African tribe � that it barely requires refutation. What is the religious response for the current crisis ? �the emergence of the economic impact of humanity on the biosphere as a whole is so new that it is perhaps to be expected that no religious traditions independently mirroring the relatively recent scientific understanding of the problem have yet emerged� in other words, even if you were to accept the � extremely metaphorical � connection between religion and the ecological niche mankind posses, the connection is obsolete. Nonetheless, there is hope. Eldredge observes �a growing movement in conservative Christian circles, a movement that can only be described as �green�� (p.167) Now this is patently irrelevant. As much as the leftist and secular environmentalists may applaud that our religious brethren are finally opening their eyes to a danger that has been known since the 1970s, what does that have to do with their religion? If the religious wants to join the good fight, they are welcome to it, but it doesn�t make the struggle for biodiversity religious. Eldredge has redefined religion in such a way as to make it unrecognizable. The problem of religion will not go away so easily. Eldredge simply refuses to except that the existence or inexistence of God is an empirical question � and he hides the differences between science and religion with obfuscationist rhetoric. Eldredge dares say that on the one hand �we created God in our own image� but that does not say that �the concept of God in question� does not exist in precisely the manner Christian theology specifies� (p. 166 note 12). Of course not � but no one can take seriously the idea that we invented God in our own image and somehow miraculously captured the way God really is like. Eldredge claims to respect all religions, but if religion is false it does not deserve respect. Rather, like any other false idea, it should be discarded, and whatever social role it plays must be taken over by an institution based on truth, not myth.
Rating:
Summary: There is a war
Review: Having read, reviewed and thoroughly enjoyed Niles Eldredge's 'Reinventing Darwin', I was looking forward to his account of the creationism controversy. Although an interesting read, I found unfocused and disappointing. Much of the problem is that Eldredge writes what are in essence several different books. We have discussions of the Scientific Method, primers on evolution, the fossil record, patterns of life and punctuated equilibrium, attacks on young earth creationism, and a reply to Intelligent Design Creationism. All this in a framework (expressed in the introduction and the concluding chapter) claiming that religion, along with science, can solve the great challenge that lays ahead of us - the ecological crises and the threat to biodiversity. Unfortunately, there are much better essays on each of these issues, and that the strength of Eldredge's arguments vary considerably between these issues. After an interesting introduction, Eldredge treats us with a sound but all too brief discussion on scientific methodology. Eldredge explains how in science, we have a hierarchy of ideas - some extremely well established (like the 'fact' that the Earth is round and that life evolved) and some more speculative (like the superstring theory or the age of the universe). Thus the creationist regular chant that evolution is 'just a theory' is meaningless. It is a good discussion, but more sophisticated accounts exist. My personal favorite is chapter four of Alan Sokal and Jean Bricmont's Intellectual Impostures ('Fashionable Nonsense' in the American edition). Chapter three 'The Fossil Record' is probably the dullest chapter in the book. There is very little wrong with the discussion of the evolution of life in it - although it maybe stresses the ideas of Eldredges's 'Naturalist' school a little too much - but it is not very coherent. Eldredge simply is not the master of prose that Gould and Dawkins are. Chapter four, which deals with Natural selection and punctuated Equilibrium is much better, in part because of its lovely history of evolutionary thought structure, and in part due to the eloquent 'Naturalist' account of evolutionary theory - with all the stress on Punctuated Equilibrium you would expect from its co-creator. Chapter five is an attack on Young Earth Creationism. It deals mostly with Geology, and is both competent and unexceptional. In Chapter Six, Eldredge argues that Creationists are often dishonest, and takes on the Intelligent Design movement headed by Phillip Johnson. For the most part he does a good job. Nonetheless, better criticism of Johnson's concept of 'atheistic materialism' appear in 'Tower of Babel: The Evidence against the New Creationism' by Robert T. Pennock. The critique of Michel Behe's irreducible complexity, while true, is far from thorough (the best review on Behe is an on line article in the Boston Review 'Intelligent Design, Again' by H. Allen Orr). Furthermore, on this chapter and on the next one, Eldredge bends over backwards to please the religious, especially Christians. The matter here is the association between evolution and atheism. While anti-evolutionists wish to equate evolution with atheism, biologists like Gould and Eldredge sometimes fall into the opposite trap ' pretending that there is no discord between evolution and religion. Actually, while evolution does not disprove Christianity (or religion in general), it certainly poses a challenge to Christianity which Christian apologetics should face if they wish to persuade us that Christianity is true or at least intellectually acceptable. The tendency grows worse. In chapter seven, Eldredge falls deeper into the 'bending over' trap. Eldredge claims that he sees a great role for religion in the future ' religion is mankind's tool to fight off the coming ecological crisis. Eldredge thinks that religion mirrors ecology ' 'religious traditions, especially as embodied in concepts of God, are deeply if not wholly ecological concepts as well' (p. 162). He 'demonstrates' this by an argument so thin ' using only two examples, one of them from the King James Bible and one from an African tribe ' that it barely requires refutation. What is the religious response for the current crisis ? 'the emergence of the economic impact of humanity on the biosphere as a whole is so new that it is perhaps to be expected that no religious traditions independently mirroring the relatively recent scientific understanding of the problem have yet emerged' in other words, even if you were to accept the ' extremely metaphorical ' connection between religion and the ecological niche mankind posses, the connection is obsolete. Nonetheless, there is hope. Eldredge observes 'a growing movement in conservative Christian circles, a movement that can only be described as 'green'' (p.167) Now this is patently irrelevant. As much as the leftist and secular environmentalists may applaud that our religious brethren are finally opening their eyes to a danger that has been known since the 1970s, what does that have to do with their religion? If the religious wants to join the good fight, they are welcome to it, but it doesn't make the struggle for biodiversity religious. Eldredge has redefined religion in such a way as to make it unrecognizable. The problem of religion will not go away so easily. Eldredge simply refuses to except that the existence or inexistence of God is an empirical question ' and he hides the differences between science and religion with obfuscationist rhetoric. Eldredge dares say that on the one hand 'we created God in our own image' but that does not say that 'the concept of God in question' does not exist in precisely the manner Christian theology specifies' (p. 166 note 12). Of course not ' but no one can take seriously the idea that we invented God in our own image and somehow miraculously captured the way God really is like. Eldredge claims to respect all religions, but if religion is false it does not deserve respect. Rather, like any other false idea, it should be discarded, and whatever social role it plays must be taken over by an institution based on truth, not myth.
Rating:
Summary: Championing science and reason
Review: It isn't pure chance that Americans hold the most Nobel Prizes. The Framers of the Constitution granted the greatest boon given any nation - separation of churches and the state. Within this framework, religious dogmas have been kept from public school classrooms and American science education is among the best in the world. However, this foundation has been subject to erosion, increasingly in recent years. This book was written to stem that decay. A spectre is haunting the classrooms of North American schools, and "Eldredge the Exorcist" may be the instrument to expel it. The demon is Christian creationism targeting Darwin's evolution by natural selection. As Eldredge makes clear, it is Christians, not scientists, who have fostered the science vs. religion "wars." While few scientists eschew spirits as having any role in nature's processes, their beliefs aren't essential to their work. Christians, declaring their monopoly on "morals" and "ethics" still fear that teaching Darwin's natural selection will erode that control. As Eldredge notes, they have maintained an ongoing campaign to govern the classroom throughout the 20th Century. Nor, he demonstrates, have the sprinkling of court decisions seriously impaired their efforts. He calls for readers to uphold the cause of good science education, offering a list of tactics and resources to apply in support of teachers and schools. And students, if they care to look. He provides an excellent summary of the history and development of thinking about evolution. From Darwin's original idea through the era of dispute over the role of genetics, to the idea of "punk eek" he and Gould devised, Eldredge covers a great deal of ground. A staunch defender of science, he's a good analyst and witty writer. Readers are not swamped with jargon or arcane ideas. The presentation is clear, precise and generally well balanced. From the essence of evolutionary thinking, Eldredge takes us on a tour of Christian creationist assaults on Darwin's "dangerous idea." These are pitifully underpinned and often expressed defying analysis. Christian creationists are at war with science, but Darwin's natural selection in particular. No tactic appears out of bounds, from misquotes through devious tactics to outright falsehood. No matter, they say. This is a question of morality and ethics. Eldredge's summary of why Christian creationists feel the need to campaign against Darwin and carrying their battle into the classroom is excellent. He alludes to the alliance of Christian creationists and politics as one striving to restore a view [no matter how flawed] of social mores and control. He also fears the rising degradation of the environment as stemming from Christian adherence to the idea of humans having "dominion over the earth" granted them by their many Bibles. He's sensitive to the rapid loss of biodiversity. Keeping classrooms free of false dogmas is a starting point for saving this planet. There are few flaws in this book, and these are limited to overstressing his own evolutionary theory. As co-developer [with Stephen Gould] of the idea of "punctuated equilibrium," Eldredge gives this idea rather more space than it deserves. He also surrenders to the impulse of chastising Richard Dawkins with words nearly as harsh as he uses on the Christians. Calling Dawkins "stupid" would be hilarious in any other writer. In Eldredge, it's unforgivable. That issue will not impair readers knowledgeable about writers of evolution. Those looking at the issues for the first time, however, may be misled by his vehemence. Every parent, student, teacher, or school board member should sit down with this book and read it carefully.
Rating:
Summary: Who is This Book For?
Review: Niles Eldredge admits in this book that he could care less whether people, in their private lives, choose to believe evolution or creationism. The reason Eldredge wrote this book, then, is becuase of the evergrowing tumult over whether to teach 'intelligent design' in schools as a science. This, Eldredge contents, is often due to creationists' misunderstanding of what science is, and hence, why 'God did it,' can't qualify as serious science, and also creationists' misunderstanding (or willing misreading) of sceintific evidence corroborating evolution. In brief, Eldredge is trying to 'set the record straight' on where evolution and creation stand - showing why evolultion has triumphed, and creation (in all of its incarnations), failed.
Does he succeed? Maybe. He does give a good overview of what the scientific process is, why creationism can't qualify as science, what the fossil record REALLY shows, why the 'irreducible complexity' 'argument' fails not only now, but failed when Paley formulated it over 100 years ago, etc. He smashes creationist assertions about there being no transitional forms in the fossil record (Homo Erectus anyone?!), smashes holes in creationist lunacies to do with the earth being thousands, rather than millions upon millions, of years old, and the incongruity of their denial of macro-evolution while they concede the reality of micro-evolution.
But, alas, there is one big problem with Edlredge's book - a problem that can easily contribute to the book's efficacy. The problem is that the book seems both to be too basic for already-believing evolutionists, but too complex in certain sections for creationists (and yes, I am assuming that creationists know little to no science!). On one hand, Eldredge's discussion of evolution in the first half of the book is more basic than most any evolutionary text for lay-readers that I have seen and will likely leave the evolutionist unsatisfied. At the same time, the second half of the book - where Elderedge refutes creationist claims directly, most pertaining to geology, introduces terms and ideas (without explanation or definition)that creationists will likely be unfamiliar with. Evolutionists will learn little that they didn't know before, and creationists will learn little because the book assumes too much by way of scientific knowledge, particularly about geology.
Still, I would advise creationists of all stripes to read this book as Eldredge does a good job explaining where creationism goes wrong. Especially of note, Eldredge does a good job of explaining that there ARE transitional forms (Homo erectus anyone?!), that it is virtually impossible not to see that humans and apes share a common ancestor (99% similarity in DNA!), that "God did it" does not yield empirical testability that science requires (but evolution does.)
As a well-read evolutionist, I can't say this book gave me anything I didn't know, but it at least deserves three stars for figthing the good fight.
| 
