The World Without Us in Science and Inquiry

Dec 01, 2014 Jim rated it it was ok · review of another edition

Shelves: 1audio, 2non-fiction, science

The Coda (last chapter) should probably be read first as it sums up the thrust of the book & it's not what the description & title suggest. It started out as billed, a look at what the world would look like if we disappeared, but devolved into a platform for an environmental rant with some snide political remarks thrown in. If it was a little better balanced & thorough or if it offered any solutions, I'd like it more since I'm a tree hugger, too. It's generally negative, though. He doesn't seem The Coda (last chapter) should probably be read first as it sums up the thrust of the book & it's not what the description & title suggest. It started out as billed, a look at what the world would look like if we disappeared, but devolved into a platform for an environmental rant with some snide political remarks thrown in. If it was a little better balanced & thorough or if it offered any solutions, I'd like it more since I'm a tree hugger, too. It's generally negative, though. He doesn't seem to like the human race much.

It was great that his examples are drawn from all around the world, but if this wasn't an audio book, I would have abandoned it by the half mark. Weisman obviously isn't a scientist, although he spent time with some fascinating ones in preparing this book. Too many of his statements are poorly phrased & his presentation shows far too much bias. I'm not a scientist either, but I knew enough about several topics to catch him & did a bit of research several other times his logic seemed strained. Both literally & figuratively, he often can't see the forest for the trees. Worse, he often doesn't try, but anyone with a modicum of curiosity will find a variety of interesting ideas to research more on their own.

He does a great job in showing that many of our large works are not as permanent as they seem. Most exist only because of continual, often massive maintenance. Perhaps the best example of this is the Panama Canal. He devotes a fair amount of space to discussing just how quickly the rain & jungle would wash it away. Unfortunately, the entire section is weakened by his snide outline of U.S. foreign policy, a topic he had no business addressing in this book, especially in such a cavalier fashion. It simply proved his bias.

Some of our changes to the environment are obvious & horrible, the best example being the ocean sinks & coral beds that are choked with plastics & other polymers. Some are invisible, but just as or more deadly, & will last practically forever, such as in the case of dioxins & PCBs. Others may make radical changes that will last for centuries, such as lime or other changes to the soil that change the order & types of regrowth, if we were to disappear. These he condemns without fully discussing how much the exact composition really matters from the larger perspective, though.

I'm no happier than he is about the extinction of the American Chestnut or Passenger Pigeon, but other species have taken their ecological niches, for better or worse. I doubt the squirrels are upset over having to eat more acorns & hickory nuts rather than chestnuts, though. Rock doves & starlings have filled in for the Passenger Pigeon, haven't they? If not, what is still out of balance? I wish he would have addressed this more fully, but much of it is guess work & he tended to just write it off as bad.

I was intrigued by his examples of how much man changed nature even before the Industrial Revolution. For instance, each wave of immigrants to the Americas has made huge changes. Clovis Man (first wave) may well be the cause of the extinction of the mega-mammals either through hunting or disease, a rather interesting parallel with our (fourth wave) immigration & its effects on the second & third wave immigrants (AKA Native Americans), although he only vaguely alludes to it. He also points out some other fallacies in our current perceptions about what 'natural' ecosystems were like over the ages. He didn't go into enough detail on some. For instance, it would have been nice if he had researched desertification a bit more. He points out the most obvious causes, but missed others. He especially missed all the efforts aimed at eradicating it which is far more instructive for a natural recovery.

Unfortunately, his agenda continually skews & limits his facts. For instance, his distaste for electrical generation disrupting the natural environment is obvious. Coal & nuclear plants are targeted many times over the course of the book. He never mentions what the alternatives are besides doing without, though. Hydro-electric dams & wind turbines are never mentioned at all, yet he spends a lot of time pointing out that radio & cell towers kill possibly a billion birds each year with their flashing red lights, electromagnetic radiation, & guy wires. Wind turbines combine not only all the hazards of the others, but add in spinning blades. Unlike the other towers where dead birds are usually quickly cleaned up by scavengers, wind turbines often have so many piled up that crews have to remove them. I can only conclude that he likes them because they're 'clean' energy & thus he again proves his bias.

Many of his opinions on the survival of species don't make sense to me. In the beginning he says our cattle, goats, horses, & dogs will probably die out once we are gone yet there are plenty of examples of all of these species going feral successfully. He doesn't mention pigs or sheep at all, but they are two of the most extreme examples. Feral hogs are notoriously capable & destructive (Now a real problem in my area.) while most sheep would die immediately. He does discuss the dangers of the common house cat to the environment, although they are in a different section, one dealing with his love of birds. (Toward the end he changed this somewhat & briefly mentioned pigs.)

So overall, I can't give this book the high rating some of the facts & research deserve. They're just too badly skewed. As food for thought, it has some points of interest, but most facts & every opinion should be taken with a large dose of salts. It's certainly not definitive, but could serve as a springboard for more thorough research on any topics of interest. ...more

33 likes · Like · see review

Dec 25, 2010 David Rubenstein rated it it was amazing

Shelves: biology, audiobook, archaeology, technology, history, science

On the surface, this clever book describes what the world would be like if humans were to suddenly disappear from the face of the earth. Alan Weisman begins the book by describing the probable fate of man's buildings, structures--above and below ground, and cultural artifacts. For example, New York subways would completely flood within days. Interestingly, our longest-lasting legacy will probably be the radio signals transmitted into space.

But the majority of this engaging book is really about e ...more

15 likes · Like · see review

Dec 02, 2009 Jennifer rated it liked it

This book is odd in that the happy parts involve the extinction of humans from the Earth - which isn't surprising given the title but I was still surprised by that fact just because I had never taken into account the sheer enormity of all the bad stuff we have done to our little blue planet. Sure, I see the crappy houses in the sprawl where pastures used to be, and bemoan the plastic bags in the trees, and wonder how a town the size of Sioux Falls can support one more Walgreens/Walmart/gas stati ...more

Like · see review

Jan 18, 2012 Patricrk patrick rated it really liked it

Shelves: science

a little bit dated but quite enjoyable. Shows how transient most of the works of man are likely to be (with a few exceptions). His view on New England is different from that expressed in 1492 but only to the extent to which the forest had been modified by the Indians before the Europeans arrived. If man were to vanish overnight, would Kudzu rule the south?

Like · see review

Jan 22, 2008 Angela rated it really liked it

Shelves: non-fiction

Much better than the tv special, simply because the book went into more detail. The section on plastics was particularly interesting (and disturbing).

Like · see review