I just finished reading a marvelous book titled The Greatest Show On Earth: The Evidence for Evolution by the eminent biologist Richard Dawkins. The book is about evolution, if you couldn’t tell from the title. So this review is going to be about evolution.
If you are one of those people that disagrees with the theory of evolution via natural selection, I hope you will read this full review and I hope you will read Mr. Dawkins’s book. Here in the United States, about 40% of the general public believe that that the theory of evolution is false. I italicize believe, because discounting evolution must be based on belief, not on evidence. From a scientific perspective, there isn’t a single piece of evidence, not one, that goes against this well established theory. It is considered one of the most well-proven theories in all of science. Mr. Dawkins argues, as others have, that such a well-proven theory should actually have a better name that “theory”. In science the word “theory” has a very different meaning that in general usage.
Here are the two definitions of theory as provided from the Princeton Wordnet:
- A tentative insight into the natural world; a concept that is not yet verified but that if true would explain certain facts or phenomena.
- A well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world; an organized system of accepted knowledge that applies in a variety of circumstances to explain a specific set of phenomena.
Can you understand the massive difference between these two definitions? The first one is the common, everyday, non-scientific one. It just means a hypothesis, an idea. The second is the actual scientific one, and it is pretty obvious that it caries with it the implication of proof. When you read “The Theory of Gravity” or “Einstein’s General Theory of General Relativity”, and yes, “The Theory of Evolution”, the second definition of theory is the one in use. Because of this confusion a creationist might argue against The Theory of Evolution by saying, “Its just a theory.” But in scientific parlance, that translates to “Its just a fact.”
Evolution is a fact. In general, non-scientific speak, that is the crux of it. Dawkins lays out the evidence, and wow, there is evidence. We have a rich fossil record that supports the theory of evolution, but even without a single fossil evolution would be proven. How? Our very DNA proves evolution. There is also substantial supporting evidence in the embryology of any animal, including humans. In the first weeks of gestation a human embryo is not very different from that of a fish. And it isn’t surprising, because an ancient ancestor of our race is the fish. Dawkins discusses many other pieces of supporting evidence that are to be found throughout the world, including cases where evolution has actually been observed first hand!
Dawkins also leaves the science of biology and discusses in depth the scientific methodology that proves evolution. Young earth creationist will be especially horrified to learn of the variety of dating methodologies in use by modern scientists, each corroborated by at least one other. How do we know a fossil is 10k years old or 100k years old or 1 million years old? Dawkins discusses the various techniques used to do this dating, in detail. He leaves no doubt. And then he repeats this type of discussion, rolling through a number of different scientific procedures. I really got a flavor of what biologists, geologists, anthropologists, archeologists and other scientists do when they are studying evolution. Well, I am married to a geologist so I kinda already understood some of that stuff.
Dawkins also spends portions of each chapter debunking various creationist slanders on evolution. I use the word slander because that is what it often amounts. However, the creationist isn’t always willfully ignoring the facts and presenting lies. It would appear from arguments Mr. Dawkins relates that some creationists simply don’t know any better. Their ignorance of the rich set of data available handicaps them in any debate. A common example is the creationist attack on the fossil record, the “missing link” argument. The problem with this creationist argument is that there really isn’t a missing link in the fossil record. And the fossil record doesn’t matter. As Dawkins points out, evolution is proved in several different ways that can each stand on their own, alone. Mr. Dawkins points out these types of logical fallacies over and over.
Dawkins authored the book to try to help fight the fight against ignorance. Campaigns such as “Teach the Controversy” are often conducted by creationists. Except there is not controversy. Evolution is the accepted theory. As I mentioned earlier, Dawkins points out again and again throughout the book, the areas of science where even one piece of evidence would cast a doubt on evolution, yet we do not find any such negative evidence. He actually shows where one would go (intellectually) to attempt to disprove evolution. I think this really shows the true spirit of science. Of course its easy to do when you do you are right.
I previously reviewed another book on evolution, Why Evolution Is True by Jerry Coyne. I found Coyne’s book to be an easier read than Dawkins’s book on the same subject. However, I found that Dawkins covered more material and went into some depth to show how the science is actually done, not just what the science has found.
In the end, I would find it hard to believe that anyone that gave The Greatest Show On Earth an honest read would question evolution. Not only that, but the proof against a designer fabricating the world is enormous. This will be a dangerous book for you if you are a creationist. It will challenge your beliefs with irrefutable evidence. For the scientifically-minded individual, I think you will discover a number of interesting facts, and find great enjoyment in Mr. Dawkins’s careful explanations of the science around evolutions.
