What do you think?
Rate this book
DK Eyewitness Books
Evolution
How did life begin? Is evolution just a theory? Find the answers to these and other questions in this new look at how life began.
64 pages, Hardcover
First published January 1, 1993
4 people are currently reading
136 people want to read
About the author
Linda Gamlin
60 books3 followersLinda Gamlin trained as a biochemist and worked in research for several years before turning to journalism. She specializes in writing about the immune system, allergies, and other health matters.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 11 of 11 reviews
February 21, 2020
This is a great book dealing with some really tough issues and it does it well. The book starts out with creation stories, and goes on from there. Great resource.
October 2, 2015
One of the things that is interesting about this book is to see how the evolution of evolution is tied to religious belief.
Something else I like is the continual use of pictures to orient the young reader to what things look like.
Overall, this is a great primer. And, again, I learned stuff.
But I'm wondering - is this true?
The bats spreading wing in the malls stubby digging arm have the same set of bones, as do the arms of all mammals. This astonishing similarity only makes sense if Darwin was correct and that they come from the same distant ancestor. (emphasis mine)
Maybe I'm getting too skeptical here, but it seems like it's a stretch to say that this is the only thing that can explain this.
I guess the beauty of this is that it is science, and there's still so much we don't know. Although evolution is scientific fact, there are still holes in our history and how we came to be. And we don't know exactly how every detail happened. Evolution (or any theory that explains how anything works) isn't necessarily the panacea we all hope it is. The more we learn and the more we apply the scientific method, the more we'll understand about out environment, our world, and yes, our history.
Something else I like is the continual use of pictures to orient the young reader to what things look like.
Overall, this is a great primer. And, again, I learned stuff.
But I'm wondering - is this true?
The bats spreading wing in the malls stubby digging arm have the same set of bones, as do the arms of all mammals. This astonishing similarity only makes sense if Darwin was correct and that they come from the same distant ancestor. (emphasis mine)
Maybe I'm getting too skeptical here, but it seems like it's a stretch to say that this is the only thing that can explain this.
I guess the beauty of this is that it is science, and there's still so much we don't know. Although evolution is scientific fact, there are still holes in our history and how we came to be. And we don't know exactly how every detail happened. Evolution (or any theory that explains how anything works) isn't necessarily the panacea we all hope it is. The more we learn and the more we apply the scientific method, the more we'll understand about out environment, our world, and yes, our history.
Read
February 11, 2021Son derece anlaşılır bir dil öyle ki bir çocuk dahi kolayca anlayabilir evrimin ne olduğunu. Güzel renkli ciltli bir baskı.
September 8, 2021
خیلی نتونستم ارتباط بگیرم. تا نصفه خوندم. اگر به دنبال کتاب مفهومی در مورد تکامل هستید خیلی گزینه مناسبی نیست. بیشتر برای کسی که دانشجوی زیسته خوبه. البته زبانِ کتاب ساده هستش.
July 29, 2021
It’s juvenile nonfiction, so I figured it had to be the highlights. The BEST evidence and arguments for evolution neatly summarized and easy to follow.
And it was neatly summarized and easy to follow. And I pray it’s not the best evidence and that I’ll find better eventually.
After getting halfway through I Don’t Have Enough Faith to be an Atheist, I’m overflowing with questions and need answers. That book threw out so many questions and doubts and this book just exacerbated them! The information here didn’t stand a chance against the scrutiny I was just fed.
So…I welcome suggestions on an informative book on evolution.
All I managed from reading this was to walk away feeling like evolution is just one more system where one needs blind faith to believe.
I used to feel like creation was a convenient myth to explain everything and “fill in the gaps”. “We have authority with our holy book. God did it all, don’t ask questions, don’t bother with common sense or evidence and ignore other explanations. You don’t need evidence, you’re too virtuous.”
Now it looks like evolution is the more fashionable explanation, and not because it’s a better explanation. It’s feels like an alternative myth, the inverse of creationism. Evolutionism says, “We have authority with our evidence. God didn’t do it, don’t ask questions, don’t bother with common sense and ignore other explanations. Other explanations are just ignorant. This evidence means life came from nonlife and all life has one common ancestor. Don’t ask questions about all the details, you don’t need all the answers, you’re too evolved for that.”
The book did manage to strengthen my belief that microeveolution is true.
But it did not touch my doubts concerning abiogenesis or macroevolution. They’re too weakly supported.
I’ve been complaining and heard complaints that creationists try to squeeze everything into their worldview framework…but reading this it’s easy to see the same happening with evolution.
We have this vast variety of life. Vast. And we’re told that it all started with one miraculous spark of life and branched out like a bush or family tree- not in a line. That somehow our current working ecosystem came from this common ancestor after numerous extinction events.
And we don’t have a clear timeline with fossils showing how the progression happened…we just have DNA that shows there’s great similarities. We’re told that’s because of this one common ancestor. (Not because we share the same planet…that’s not a good reason.)
On page 65 there’s this cladogram that shows the branching off of common ancestors. Shark to ray finned fish, then amphibians to mammals, next crocodiles and birds.
Ok, you’ve organized the animals attempting to prove their different characteristics point to evolution in a step by step fashion.
BUT. Have you really proven this chain of development beyond a reasonable doubt? Were no birds around when sharks were around? Were mammals here before crocodiles? How consistent is it to say that an animal can only mate with its own species in order to have fertile offspring (we know this infertility happens when donkeys mate with horses…mules have 63 chromosomes) but natural selection can, given enough time, move one species to completely different forms! Kingdom, phylum, class, order, family, genus, species! Like a little parade of life!
But we’ve got to have 2 individuals order to mate in order to a bring about a whole new species...how does that work? Haven’t you proven it can’t? How can 2 individuals change enough to be the same to mare if it’s a process unguided by intelligence? We can’t even breed fruit flies to make a new species. Sure, we can breed dogs…make teeny ones and big ones, hairless and furry…but they’re still dogs…
And the best evidence we have is to prove macroevolution is fossils of ancient horses. See, this one looks a little different than this one and so on and so forth…it’s still a horse, guys.
We’ve also got plenty of fascinating data on changes in the beaks of finches, the ratio of dark to light colored moth populations shifting as a result of pollution…but nothing particularly compelling in defense of macroevolution of abiogenesis. Just microevolution that we extrapolate to prove the macro! Just believe!!
But, you may say, there’s DNA and genetics! And the genomes are showing extreme percentages of similarities! Yes, and they’re carbon based life forms from the same planet. Shouldn’t we expect that? Do we know how much coding of DNA is needed for building instructions for nerves, skin, organs, bone, the circulatory system, enzymes to break down food, healing, growth? Could the 2.7% difference in DNA between humans and chimps just be the finer points of structure and it doesn’t mean they are ancient cousins? Maybe we don’t have many intermediates and have so many gaps in the fossil because macroevolution is not accurate. Maybe we’re trying to force this explanation.
Maybe you’d like to check out my reading activity for this book. I quoted and commented quite a bit.
I’m off now to find a book with better evidence. Hope one exists.
And it was neatly summarized and easy to follow. And I pray it’s not the best evidence and that I’ll find better eventually.
After getting halfway through I Don’t Have Enough Faith to be an Atheist, I’m overflowing with questions and need answers. That book threw out so many questions and doubts and this book just exacerbated them! The information here didn’t stand a chance against the scrutiny I was just fed.
So…I welcome suggestions on an informative book on evolution.
All I managed from reading this was to walk away feeling like evolution is just one more system where one needs blind faith to believe.
I used to feel like creation was a convenient myth to explain everything and “fill in the gaps”. “We have authority with our holy book. God did it all, don’t ask questions, don’t bother with common sense or evidence and ignore other explanations. You don’t need evidence, you’re too virtuous.”
Now it looks like evolution is the more fashionable explanation, and not because it’s a better explanation. It’s feels like an alternative myth, the inverse of creationism. Evolutionism says, “We have authority with our evidence. God didn’t do it, don’t ask questions, don’t bother with common sense and ignore other explanations. Other explanations are just ignorant. This evidence means life came from nonlife and all life has one common ancestor. Don’t ask questions about all the details, you don’t need all the answers, you’re too evolved for that.”
The book did manage to strengthen my belief that microeveolution is true.
But it did not touch my doubts concerning abiogenesis or macroevolution. They’re too weakly supported.
I’ve been complaining and heard complaints that creationists try to squeeze everything into their worldview framework…but reading this it’s easy to see the same happening with evolution.
We have this vast variety of life. Vast. And we’re told that it all started with one miraculous spark of life and branched out like a bush or family tree- not in a line. That somehow our current working ecosystem came from this common ancestor after numerous extinction events.
And we don’t have a clear timeline with fossils showing how the progression happened…we just have DNA that shows there’s great similarities. We’re told that’s because of this one common ancestor. (Not because we share the same planet…that’s not a good reason.)
On page 65 there’s this cladogram that shows the branching off of common ancestors. Shark to ray finned fish, then amphibians to mammals, next crocodiles and birds.
Ok, you’ve organized the animals attempting to prove their different characteristics point to evolution in a step by step fashion.
BUT. Have you really proven this chain of development beyond a reasonable doubt? Were no birds around when sharks were around? Were mammals here before crocodiles? How consistent is it to say that an animal can only mate with its own species in order to have fertile offspring (we know this infertility happens when donkeys mate with horses…mules have 63 chromosomes) but natural selection can, given enough time, move one species to completely different forms! Kingdom, phylum, class, order, family, genus, species! Like a little parade of life!
But we’ve got to have 2 individuals order to mate in order to a bring about a whole new species...how does that work? Haven’t you proven it can’t? How can 2 individuals change enough to be the same to mare if it’s a process unguided by intelligence? We can’t even breed fruit flies to make a new species. Sure, we can breed dogs…make teeny ones and big ones, hairless and furry…but they’re still dogs…
And the best evidence we have is to prove macroevolution is fossils of ancient horses. See, this one looks a little different than this one and so on and so forth…it’s still a horse, guys.
We’ve also got plenty of fascinating data on changes in the beaks of finches, the ratio of dark to light colored moth populations shifting as a result of pollution…but nothing particularly compelling in defense of macroevolution of abiogenesis. Just microevolution that we extrapolate to prove the macro! Just believe!!
But, you may say, there’s DNA and genetics! And the genomes are showing extreme percentages of similarities! Yes, and they’re carbon based life forms from the same planet. Shouldn’t we expect that? Do we know how much coding of DNA is needed for building instructions for nerves, skin, organs, bone, the circulatory system, enzymes to break down food, healing, growth? Could the 2.7% difference in DNA between humans and chimps just be the finer points of structure and it doesn’t mean they are ancient cousins? Maybe we don’t have many intermediates and have so many gaps in the fossil because macroevolution is not accurate. Maybe we’re trying to force this explanation.
Maybe you’d like to check out my reading activity for this book. I quoted and commented quite a bit.
I’m off now to find a book with better evidence. Hope one exists.
July 2, 2016
This is one of my most favorite book in eyewitness series. It provides a lot of information compare to other books in the same series. I find those interesting and insight (or maybe because I didn't pay attention in my high school biology class). Because of this book , I and my friend (who doesn't agree with Darwin's theory) had such an interesting discussion. 5/5 stars.
June 11, 2013
Like all Eyewitness books, this one is well presented with good illustrations. This one even has something I've never heard of: cladistics, a way of classifying organisms different from the Linnaean system.
September 19, 2011
Only unfinished because it is too advanced for my son right now...we will return to it later on.
June 15, 2013
An excellent overview of the subject with lots of well-placed illustrations.
February 13, 2014
Excellent book! Visually interesting and full of accurate, important information.
July 5, 2011
AR: UG/8.5/1.0
Displaying 1 - 11 of 11 reviews