Rating: 
Summary: Great Read
Review: This is a fabulous book. It is geared towards readers with an interest in life beyond earth, but not necessarily a graduate education in the physical sciences. It is very readable to a layman. The author does a wonderful job of explaining complex topics without oversimplifying them. It is extremely engaging, and sprinkled with humor. I have read numerous books on this topic, several of which Dr. Grinspoon references, but there were still several "ah-hahs" for me, such as: we don't have a workable definition of "life" (this 2 page section alone is worth the purchase price).
This book presents a different view than that of "Rare Earth" (another excellent book).
It's a buy!
Rating:
Summary: Both fascinating and funny
Review: This is one of the best nonfiction books I have ever read. The author is an astronomer with an excellent sense of humor and a knack for explaining scientific concepts. The main topic is the search for extraterrestrial life, but it covers an amazing array of fields: astronomy (big bang, formation of the solar system), geology (formation of the earth, plate tectonics), biology (origin of life, origin of cells, evolution), chemistry (chemicals likely to support life, the atmospheres of other planets).The book argues that science needs to move back in the direction of natural philosophy, willing to use ideas that cannot be scientifically tested but that may be useful in guiding our search for ET life. Another main point is that a culture needs to advance spiritually as well as technologically if it is going to avoid self destruction. The only complaint I have is that the author goes a little deeper into his own religious beliefs towards the end of the book than I thought was necessary.
Rating:
Summary: Toward a new science and a new way of thinking?
Review: What planetologist David Grinspoon is working on in this book is similar to the consilience that biologist Edward O. Wilson talked about in his book of that name and what C.P. Snow dreamed about in his discussions of the two academic cultures half a century ago. But what Grinspoon is reconciling is the informed and creative speculation of the human mind with the rigorous requirements of scientific orthodoxy. He uses the almost forgotten term "natural philosophy" as a means to the end of reconciling the dreamer in his soul with the scientist in his head. Grinspoon represents a new breed of scientist not afraid to speculate aloud and in public about matters that cannot be proven, to joke about them, to relate to them personally and passionately, and to say that it shouldn't be career-threatening for a scientist to venture into the realm of the unknown. He realizes how complex and wondrous is all that we know and especially all that we don't know, and that in a world of uncertainty one can still make decisions and speculate while recognizing that there is a place where science ends and natural philosophy begins. In this regard is a nice quote from Bertrand Russell: "When one admits that nothing is certain one must, I think, also add that some things are more nearly certain than others." (p. 374) This is perhaps Grinspoon's major point. He seeks to separate not just pseudoscience from science, but the likely from the unlikely, and to allow the unproven to remain the unproven but without prejudice. He admits his biases and he gives his reasons for them. At the same time he allows that he could be wrong and hopes that in some cases he is. "Aliens on the White House lawn?--Not yet, but it could happen," might be a fair way to summarize Grinspoon's position. This book is about why we think about alien life (which is in some sense just a metaphor for the unknown) and how our emphasis and focus have changed over time, and what we know and what we don't know, and what the prospects are for finding answers. Grinspoon is clearly on the side of the angels in spirit, but with the Skeptical Inquirer in cognition. Grinspoon knows that the new science, like the new music, always sounds discordant to the establishment. But because he comes from a personal culture steeped in the ideas of Carl Sagan, Isaac Asimov, Olaf Stapledon, Arthur C. Clarke, Robert Heinlein, etc., not to mention Stanley Kubrick and Steven Spielberg, Bob Dylan and Jerry Steinfeld and, yes, even Madonna, he doesn't care. Let the establishment cope with the new sciences of complexity, astrobiology, chaos, and let them grapple with the inadequate definitions of "life" and "consciousness." Let them rankle at Gaia and squirm at group selection. Grinspoon wants to go beyond that. He wants us to become one of the "immortals"--civilizations so advanced and in tune with the cosmos that they will never die until the universe grows cold, and maybe not even then. Here are some examples of Grinspoon's thought and expression in this wonderfully expressive and exciting book: "[O]ther planets must be inhabited because natural selection would fashion living beings to take advantage of local conditions..." (p. 36) Recalling Percival Lowell's Martian canals: Gaps in the "sketchy data at the limits of current abilities...may be filled by our desires, [and] by the power of suggestion..." (p. 39) Asserting that "the planets were where we thought they'd be and...we reached them...has got to be the most solid confirmation of the scientific and technological revolutions of the past four centuries," Grinspoon adds in a characteristic footnote: "Stuff that in your socially constructed pipe and smoke it!" (p. 62) "We don't really know what life is. We may as well try and catch the wind as pin life down with a tidy definition." (p. 98) --By the way, this incorporation of song lyric and scientific thought is something that Grinspoon does very well throughout the book. ("We really don't know life at all." --Joni Mitchell) How did single-celled organics beget multi-celled organisms? "This, not some shadowy ape-man, is the real 'missing link' in evolution." (p. 113) "We are the life of the sun." (p. 123) --One of my favorite ideas that is not scientific because it begs the question of the definition of life. It is an idea--typical of what Grinspoon is getting at--that needs contemplation. "Thank Gaia..." (p. 134) "The classical concept of the habitable zone starts to seem like a bourgeois notion invented by self-centered, Sun-worshiping surface dwellers." (p. 199) "Who are we to say that the universe couldn't make some kind of complex, self-organizing, evolving structures using its gravitational or nuclear forces, forming living structures that are too large or small for us to notice?" (p. 265) Our consciousness "is most likely just some vague foreshadowing of what would be called true consciousness..." (p. 396) Grinspoon employs a self-effacing, disarming literary style that uses the idioms of popular culture to make his points. Don't be fooled! Grinspoon is an expert in several disciplines including evolutionary biology, astronomy and cosmology. Although he makes no such claim I can tell by some of what he writes that he is also an expert on world religions. (See especially pages 383-385.) It is refreshing to read a scientist who understands religion since few people do, including the so-called religious. Grinspoon rejects monotheism. He doesn't say why or for what, but I suspect he sees God as beyond any of the attributes that we can dream up for God. Perhaps Grinspoon is enamored of the God of the Vedas about which nothing can be said, a God without an attribute that we could name. Certainly he rejects "scientism" and any personal god. My guess is he is saving these ideas for a future opus. I will be reading that book. I highly recommend that you read this one.
Rating: 
Summary: Good start...
Review: You are a Star Trek fan (like me) and you are watching an episode. The crew needs to find a planet to beam down to. They scan the solar system they are in and they find one Class M planet (in trekkie lingo, this is a planet with breathable atmosphere). They beam down and encounter a race with two arms, two legs and funny foreheads. They communicate easily with them. If you can't find at least 50 improbable things with this scene, YOU MUST READ THIS BOOK. It will change the way you think about extraterrestrial life. The writer is an astrobiologist that worked for NASA and others. He goes easy on the science side, not demanding much from readers. There is a good historical background on the concept of alien life, a good, detailed description of the characteristics of some planets and moons in our solar system and whatever we know about the newly found planets orbiting other stars (which is not much) and details about the SETI project. The main problem I found is that although we don't know anything about alien life (and the author is the first to admit it) scientific speculation abounds. And surprisingly, there is very little of it in this book. While discussing the possibility of life in other planets he mentions that "Life doesn't need to be carbon-based". But then what are the other possible chemical elements that could create a complex, self-replicating structure (the basis for life)? He briefly mentions sulfur. What else? Apart from a self-replicating molecule, what other characteristics could we logically find in ET life? He briefly mentions "cell boundaries". Good. What else? Of course, no one has the answers but... How should we think about these questions? What are some possible scenarios? This is what I was looking for in a book written by a scientist. Also, he chooses to talk about the UFO cult and other personal experiences that are moderately amusing. No, he doesn't "want to believe" but he finds the cults a fascinating social phenomenon. Maybe you will too. All in all, an easy to read book, humorous (a bit goofy at times), informative, and a good introduction to the subject. But expect no fascinating insights.
| 
