What do you think?
Nature's I.Q.
It is not at all surprising that insects behave like insects, birds behave like birds, and mammals behave like mammals. They execute most of their intricate behavior in a predetermined, instinctive manner. But how do they know when and how they should act? Where did the intelligence that is manifested in nature come from? Can the current view be true, that inert matter (lacking consciousness) somehow acquired intelligence over the course of a vast span of time? Darwin's theory of evolution is widely accepted as the explanation for the varieties of life. Evolutionists attempt to explain the origin of behavioral patterns by gradual modifications of more simple behavior forms. But when we try to explain complex animal behavior this way, it becomes impossible! Nature's IQ invites the reader to investigate an alternative explanation. Is it possible that our world reflects, in many different ways, a supernatural intelligence that has applied its own infinitely ingenious solutions to create the living world?
160 pages, Hardcover
First published January 1, 2009
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 1 of 1 review
June 2, 2017
This book is super hard to rate. You'll see why below.
I didn't realize the subtitle was meant so literally, that this was actually an anti-evolution book. The authors do present one interesting argument against the theory that evolution happens by small mutations that prove useful to a species and thus get passed on. They argue that the intermediary steps wouldn't be useful and thus wouldn't be passed on. As a corollary, they argue that an animal's instinct (not learned behaviors) so perfectly match that animal's anatomy, that it's inconceivable that these could have developed independently by small steps. To someone like me, who is not as well versed as I should be on the theory of evolution, this could be a compelling argument. It's also presented well. Unfortunately it's then presented again. And again. And again. And again. And then...again. I really love the parts about the complexity of animals and their perfectly aligned behaviors. But...how many times can you use such examples to state the same argument, almost verbatim? Repetition does not truth make.
I started skimming or skipping these repetitive sections early on and just reading the animal facts. So perhaps I missed it when the authors addressed (or tried to debunk) the theory of punctuated equilibrium or other more modern aspects of evolution theory. Maybe I missed it when they addressed any of their opponents' counter-arguments. However, I have a feeling I didn't miss it.
I also don't follow the book's main line of reasoning, which seems to be mainly this: Darwin's theory of evolution is imperfect (as evidenced by this one flaw the book has hammered home) and we don't understand everything about the fantastic complexity of nature and how it got that way, so...there has to be an intelligent designer (God). I don't think that is the only conclusion to be drawn. I think it more likely that we just don't have a perfect understanding of evolution. And who knows, maybe there's a god. Maybe he used evolution as a tool. Maybe evolution is only true as far as any given creature can evolve into a more efficient version of itself or a version more adapted to a changing environment. Maybe the universe is actually sitting on the back of a giant turtle. There's just so much that we don't understand.
Far from being an objective academic work or a fair exploration for the layman, this book is quite unscientifically—and almost comically—disparaging of all the mindless hordes who believe in evolution and don't think for themselves. It also seems intent on attacking an overly simplified and somewhat antiquated version of evolution.
So, my ratings for...
The pictures and facts about animals: 5 stars.
The thought-provokingness of their one argument (to a trusting layman): 4 stars
The depth and breadth of their arguments: 1 star
The fairness of their presentation of the opposition: 1 star
The professional and scientific delivery of their conclusions: 1 star.
The writing itself when describing the animals and their behaviors: 4 stars.
Super hard to rate overall. I you read it just for the fascinating animal stuff and skip much of the rest, you'll enjoy it (at least 3 stars). If you're a creationist, you'll love it (as evidenced by all the 5-star reviews.) Otherwise...I suggest picking up another book.
I didn't realize the subtitle was meant so literally, that this was actually an anti-evolution book. The authors do present one interesting argument against the theory that evolution happens by small mutations that prove useful to a species and thus get passed on. They argue that the intermediary steps wouldn't be useful and thus wouldn't be passed on. As a corollary, they argue that an animal's instinct (not learned behaviors) so perfectly match that animal's anatomy, that it's inconceivable that these could have developed independently by small steps. To someone like me, who is not as well versed as I should be on the theory of evolution, this could be a compelling argument. It's also presented well. Unfortunately it's then presented again. And again. And again. And again. And then...again. I really love the parts about the complexity of animals and their perfectly aligned behaviors. But...how many times can you use such examples to state the same argument, almost verbatim? Repetition does not truth make.
I started skimming or skipping these repetitive sections early on and just reading the animal facts. So perhaps I missed it when the authors addressed (or tried to debunk) the theory of punctuated equilibrium or other more modern aspects of evolution theory. Maybe I missed it when they addressed any of their opponents' counter-arguments. However, I have a feeling I didn't miss it.
I also don't follow the book's main line of reasoning, which seems to be mainly this: Darwin's theory of evolution is imperfect (as evidenced by this one flaw the book has hammered home) and we don't understand everything about the fantastic complexity of nature and how it got that way, so...there has to be an intelligent designer (God). I don't think that is the only conclusion to be drawn. I think it more likely that we just don't have a perfect understanding of evolution. And who knows, maybe there's a god. Maybe he used evolution as a tool. Maybe evolution is only true as far as any given creature can evolve into a more efficient version of itself or a version more adapted to a changing environment. Maybe the universe is actually sitting on the back of a giant turtle. There's just so much that we don't understand.
Far from being an objective academic work or a fair exploration for the layman, this book is quite unscientifically—and almost comically—disparaging of all the mindless hordes who believe in evolution and don't think for themselves. It also seems intent on attacking an overly simplified and somewhat antiquated version of evolution.
So, my ratings for...
The pictures and facts about animals: 5 stars.
The thought-provokingness of their one argument (to a trusting layman): 4 stars
The depth and breadth of their arguments: 1 star
The fairness of their presentation of the opposition: 1 star
The professional and scientific delivery of their conclusions: 1 star.
The writing itself when describing the animals and their behaviors: 4 stars.
Super hard to rate overall. I you read it just for the fascinating animal stuff and skip much of the rest, you'll enjoy it (at least 3 stars). If you're a creationist, you'll love it (as evidenced by all the 5-star reviews.) Otherwise...I suggest picking up another book.
Displaying 1 - 1 of 1 review