Status
Available
Call number
Collection
Publication
Viking Adult (2009), Edition: First Edition, 304 pages
Description
Presents the many threads of modern work in genetics, paleontology, geology, molecular biology, and anatomy that demonstrate the indelible stamp of the evolutionary processes first proposed by Darwin.
Media reviews
If you see how the reasoning works you’ll understand this isn’t particularly a problem for someone already committed to evolution in its totality. Because we all share a common ancestor, at some point reproduction had to evolve into the sexual realm, and because that has clearly happened, it
Show More
must offer some kind of genetic advantage even if we don’t know what it is. I don’t know about you, but that sounds like faith in the absence of evidence to me. Show Less
User reviews
LibraryThing member madcurrin
I initially didn't want to pick this book up for its aggressive title. But once you start reading, it doesn't take long to realize that the title is not intended to be aggressive; it's simply the most appropriate. 'Why Evolution Is True' is actually a very pleasant book about the overwhelming
With his explanation of how scientific theories are tested, the argument that evolution is "just a theory" is kicked for touch in the first chapter. Then it's down to business looking at the evidence. Coyne's approach is to say, in effect, 'here is what the evidence shows, here is how we test it, and this is why everything points to evolution being true.' The weight of evidence is astounding. As he says in the closing sections, "Despite a million chances to be wrong, evolution always comes up right. That is as close as we can get to a scientific truth."
It is a fast, simple and devastatingly convincing read. For me, evolution has always been a topic out on the periphery in which I have never had much specific interest. This book got me interested. As a user friendly introduction to what can often be an unnecessarily contentious topic, 'Why Evolution Is True' is highly, highly recommended.
Show More
evidence FOR evolution, rather than a point by point deconstruction of creationism. Coyne is not in any way bitter or towards religion. He is simply interested in showing why evolution is true. By 'true', he means scientifically proven. With his explanation of how scientific theories are tested, the argument that evolution is "just a theory" is kicked for touch in the first chapter. Then it's down to business looking at the evidence. Coyne's approach is to say, in effect, 'here is what the evidence shows, here is how we test it, and this is why everything points to evolution being true.' The weight of evidence is astounding. As he says in the closing sections, "Despite a million chances to be wrong, evolution always comes up right. That is as close as we can get to a scientific truth."
It is a fast, simple and devastatingly convincing read. For me, evolution has always been a topic out on the periphery in which I have never had much specific interest. This book got me interested. As a user friendly introduction to what can often be an unnecessarily contentious topic, 'Why Evolution Is True' is highly, highly recommended.
Show Less
LibraryThing member Alex1952
This is one the best books on evolution that I read and it certainly clarified a number of issues for me. Coyne writes well and provides full explanations in easy to understand language. He has an uncanny ability to anticipate questions: many a times I found myself reading a paragraph and forming
Coyne is also an unbiased writer as he will tell you whether or not the evidence exist even for the things that he has developed a preference. For example, although he seems to favour the "good gene" model as an explanation of sexual selection (i.e., females select males who have, in their estimation, good genes) he also says that there are only two studies that support this theory, while many other studies do not.
The book covers the gamut of the evidence in support of evolution: genetic, laboratory studies, the fossil record, vestigial organs, embryology, mathematical models, accurate predictions of the theory, geographic distribution of species, replication of evolutionary outcomes by mixing species that were suspected to form the parents of the new species and finally bad design (i.e., evolutionary left-overs the are not optimal biologically and would not have been there if someone had created that species from scratch, e.g., the descenting human testicle). The evidence is not only overwhelming, but robust. Which raises the question "how could any sane person not accept the theory"? Or "how could there still be controversy as to whether or not it is true?"...more on this momentarily.
The only negative thing I have to say about this book is a statement that Coyne makes twice (probably an oversight). He says that "the theory of evolution" is a fact. But it is not "the theory" that is a fact but rather "evolution". The theory contains more than just facts that prove evolution . It contains explanations about how and why evolution happens and as he says there is still controversy about the relative importance of the mechanisms that bring about evolution.
I would also like to make a semantic point about the discussion on randomness versus non-randomness in evolution by selection. Coyne says that the genetic mutations (both incorrect copies of genes and gene drift) that are necessary to create a genetically variant population and hence enable evolution are random, but natural selection is not. Well, if a population is genetically variant and a random natural phenomenon happens (the example that Coyne provides is rise of the land bridge between north and south America), then which mutations are stuck on which side of the Panama canal is also random and hence their evolution happens because of two random events: a) the geological event and b) the location at which the species with the particular mutations found itself stuck by chance. So it is not clear to me what we mean here by "natural selection" being none-random. Yes, given a distribution of genetic variants and an environment, then natural selection will select the fitter genes. But both the location of the "fitter" genes (being on the east or the west side of the Panama canal) and the geological event are random events - natural selection has to work with what it has it cannot make up things! Furthermore, "fitter" is a relative concept, not an absolute concept. A gene is fitter given what else is in that environment. But what other species got isolated on the west side of Panama canal was also a random event and natural selection may have made a different selection if some of those species did not happen to get isolated by chance. In any case this is not an important issue.
I now come to the issue of Intelligent Design and the resistance to the evolutionary evidence by those who believe in ID. I would classify the ID supporters into two groups: the first group consists of snake-oil salesmen. They sell ID not because they believe in it, but because they profit from doing so. Although these guys are morally despicable and annoying, they are not the real problem since if the activity becomes unprofitable they will simply abandon it and move on to the next con-job. Then we have the second group who really believes in ID. Michael McGuire in his book Believing: The Neuroscience of Fantasies, Fears, and Convictions mentions the case of a woman patient of his who, although rational in other issues, believed that her parents were not her real parents. And she believed this despite of all the evidence provided to her by her parents, grandparents, the hospital and other friends and relatives who were around when she was born! According to McGuire, we form beliefs all the time about everything and the job of our brain is to reduce the distance between evidence and the belief. And if the evidence do not exist, our brain will make it up. But why should our brains make up evidence in support of ID? I would argue that this is so because of the costs and benefits involved. Some people's belief in God is tightly connected to their need to believe in afterlife. And this issue is much more important to them than the belief in evidence-based explanations of the origin of species. As such, these folks' brains will make up whatever they need to maintain their belief in God and hence afterlife.
So, are these folks a lost cause then, similar in nature to people who suffer from schizophrenia? I think so.
Is there a point in trying to argue with them rationally? Trying to convince them that, say, morality is not going to suffer if we believe in evolution and that people who believed in ID from 4,000 BC to about 1945 were severely more morally depraved and brutal to each other then today's atheists or liberal-minded people? I don't think so. It is just a waist of time and energy.
So is there anything we could do? Yes, I think the solution is not to try to convince them of their erroneous beliefs by rational arguments and evidence, but rather to give them a way out so they can believe in ID and evolution at the same time! How is this possible? Well, evolution says nothing about the rise of the first cell organism. Where and How did it come about? So we could point them to a theory that says that God knew exactly what he was doing when he created the conditions that gave rise to the first single-cell organism. This was the "divine spark" that was needed to start evolution! And this is what the Bible means when it talks allegorically about Adam and Eve. The rest took care of itself and God did not really have to be involved in the minutia of evolution since he knew the outcome anyway (let's not forget that he omniscient). This way there is no contradiction between the theory of evolution and God's books, since evolution does not try to explain that part. But, one could argue, this will only push the inevitable conflict into some distant point in the future. It does not solve anything. True, but in the meantime we can go on teaching evolution at schools and not teaching ID...and who knows what will happen after several generations have been brought up in this model.
Finally, evolutionary biologists need to get a bit more critical of evolutionary psychologists who are spoiling the field for them. Coyne talks about them and their "Just so" stories, but we need more of that. These guys should not even be considered as scientists. And perhaps the language needs to improve a bit. Although Coyne explains the randomness and purposelessness of evolution, other than genetic propagation, sometimes he even sounds like natural selection or species adaptations have some kind of intentionality. Even the words "natural selection" imply that "nature" has some kind of purpose or intention. Maybe it is time to leave Darwin's words behind?
Show More
questions like "...but what about...?" only to find this same question with its answer a few paragraphs below - sometimes it was unnerving!Coyne is also an unbiased writer as he will tell you whether or not the evidence exist even for the things that he has developed a preference. For example, although he seems to favour the "good gene" model as an explanation of sexual selection (i.e., females select males who have, in their estimation, good genes) he also says that there are only two studies that support this theory, while many other studies do not.
The book covers the gamut of the evidence in support of evolution: genetic, laboratory studies, the fossil record, vestigial organs, embryology, mathematical models, accurate predictions of the theory, geographic distribution of species, replication of evolutionary outcomes by mixing species that were suspected to form the parents of the new species and finally bad design (i.e., evolutionary left-overs the are not optimal biologically and would not have been there if someone had created that species from scratch, e.g., the descenting human testicle). The evidence is not only overwhelming, but robust. Which raises the question "how could any sane person not accept the theory"? Or "how could there still be controversy as to whether or not it is true?"...more on this momentarily.
The only negative thing I have to say about this book is a statement that Coyne makes twice (probably an oversight). He says that "the theory of evolution" is a fact. But it is not "the theory" that is a fact but rather "evolution". The theory contains more than just facts that prove evolution . It contains explanations about how and why evolution happens and as he says there is still controversy about the relative importance of the mechanisms that bring about evolution.
I would also like to make a semantic point about the discussion on randomness versus non-randomness in evolution by selection. Coyne says that the genetic mutations (both incorrect copies of genes and gene drift) that are necessary to create a genetically variant population and hence enable evolution are random, but natural selection is not. Well, if a population is genetically variant and a random natural phenomenon happens (the example that Coyne provides is rise of the land bridge between north and south America), then which mutations are stuck on which side of the Panama canal is also random and hence their evolution happens because of two random events: a) the geological event and b) the location at which the species with the particular mutations found itself stuck by chance. So it is not clear to me what we mean here by "natural selection" being none-random. Yes, given a distribution of genetic variants and an environment, then natural selection will select the fitter genes. But both the location of the "fitter" genes (being on the east or the west side of the Panama canal) and the geological event are random events - natural selection has to work with what it has it cannot make up things! Furthermore, "fitter" is a relative concept, not an absolute concept. A gene is fitter given what else is in that environment. But what other species got isolated on the west side of Panama canal was also a random event and natural selection may have made a different selection if some of those species did not happen to get isolated by chance. In any case this is not an important issue.
I now come to the issue of Intelligent Design and the resistance to the evolutionary evidence by those who believe in ID. I would classify the ID supporters into two groups: the first group consists of snake-oil salesmen. They sell ID not because they believe in it, but because they profit from doing so. Although these guys are morally despicable and annoying, they are not the real problem since if the activity becomes unprofitable they will simply abandon it and move on to the next con-job. Then we have the second group who really believes in ID. Michael McGuire in his book Believing: The Neuroscience of Fantasies, Fears, and Convictions mentions the case of a woman patient of his who, although rational in other issues, believed that her parents were not her real parents. And she believed this despite of all the evidence provided to her by her parents, grandparents, the hospital and other friends and relatives who were around when she was born! According to McGuire, we form beliefs all the time about everything and the job of our brain is to reduce the distance between evidence and the belief. And if the evidence do not exist, our brain will make it up. But why should our brains make up evidence in support of ID? I would argue that this is so because of the costs and benefits involved. Some people's belief in God is tightly connected to their need to believe in afterlife. And this issue is much more important to them than the belief in evidence-based explanations of the origin of species. As such, these folks' brains will make up whatever they need to maintain their belief in God and hence afterlife.
So, are these folks a lost cause then, similar in nature to people who suffer from schizophrenia? I think so.
Is there a point in trying to argue with them rationally? Trying to convince them that, say, morality is not going to suffer if we believe in evolution and that people who believed in ID from 4,000 BC to about 1945 were severely more morally depraved and brutal to each other then today's atheists or liberal-minded people? I don't think so. It is just a waist of time and energy.
So is there anything we could do? Yes, I think the solution is not to try to convince them of their erroneous beliefs by rational arguments and evidence, but rather to give them a way out so they can believe in ID and evolution at the same time! How is this possible? Well, evolution says nothing about the rise of the first cell organism. Where and How did it come about? So we could point them to a theory that says that God knew exactly what he was doing when he created the conditions that gave rise to the first single-cell organism. This was the "divine spark" that was needed to start evolution! And this is what the Bible means when it talks allegorically about Adam and Eve. The rest took care of itself and God did not really have to be involved in the minutia of evolution since he knew the outcome anyway (let's not forget that he omniscient). This way there is no contradiction between the theory of evolution and God's books, since evolution does not try to explain that part. But, one could argue, this will only push the inevitable conflict into some distant point in the future. It does not solve anything. True, but in the meantime we can go on teaching evolution at schools and not teaching ID...and who knows what will happen after several generations have been brought up in this model.
Finally, evolutionary biologists need to get a bit more critical of evolutionary psychologists who are spoiling the field for them. Coyne talks about them and their "Just so" stories, but we need more of that. These guys should not even be considered as scientists. And perhaps the language needs to improve a bit. Although Coyne explains the randomness and purposelessness of evolution, other than genetic propagation, sometimes he even sounds like natural selection or species adaptations have some kind of intentionality. Even the words "natural selection" imply that "nature" has some kind of purpose or intention. Maybe it is time to leave Darwin's words behind?
Show Less
LibraryThing member SatansParakeet
Coyne has written a book that explains much of the best evidence for evolution in a clear way that should be accessible to the general reading public. Anyone who is interested in either side of the creation/evolution debate should pick this up. Coyne is very clearly on the side of evolution, as the
Show More
title suggests, but if you are gong to argue for creationism you need to at least understand the arguments that the other side is making. For those of you, like me, who were pretty sure evolution was true, but didn't have the scientific background in biology to clearly articulate why, this book offers a very good starting point. Show Less
LibraryThing member Sovranty
Gentle and full of descriptive examples, Why Evolution is True is an excellent book for those who may be on the fence about the truth behind evolution. This book is equally a good read for those who already accept the evidence supporting and process of evolution. Coyne covers evolution in a wide
Show More
range of species, to include humans, and time, to the present, in an easy-to-understand manner. Show Less
LibraryThing member Noisy
Deserves all the plaudits. Thoroughly readable, and well constructed.
I wasn't the target audience, and little was really new to me, but I didn't flag in the middle and slowly drift away as I have done for a number of other popular science works. This covers all the bases of the pyramid of evidence
I wasn't the target audience, and little was really new to me, but I didn't flag in the middle and slowly drift away as I have done for a number of other popular science works. This covers all the bases of the pyramid of evidence
Show More
that supports evolutionary theory and shows how they tie together, are mutually-supporting, and lead to predictions that can be tested. So, even though it doesn't have the depth of a more focussed work, I'd still recommend this for someone who doesn't need convincing that evolution is true, but who wants to see how the jigsaw of evidence is constructed. Show Less
LibraryThing member reannon
Coyne has done an excellent job of explaining evolution in terms understandable to the lay person. He explains that scientific theories are not "just theories" but well-thought out structures that both explain observed phenomena and predict solutions to not-yet made observations. There is no
Coyne painstakingly goes through the proofs that natural selection is the only mechanism that can explain what we know from many different fields. He is a good writer and manages quite well most of the time to be comprehensible to the non-scientist. Well done, and highly recommended.
Show More
clear-cut line where a scientific theory becomes scientific fact, but evolution is as well-proven as anything else in science. It has both explained much of the scientific record and predicted other parts. For example, biologists have looked at the fossil record and predicted that fossils of certain transitional animals would be found in fossil records of a certain date, and then gone out and found just those fossils.Coyne painstakingly goes through the proofs that natural selection is the only mechanism that can explain what we know from many different fields. He is a good writer and manages quite well most of the time to be comprehensible to the non-scientist. Well done, and highly recommended.
Show Less
LibraryThing member MartinBodek
Evolution is the most beautiful, astonishing and splendid thing to contemplate in all of creation. To me, it is more extraordinary than the workings of the cosmos or the details of the subatomic realm. I consider it a priviledge to have read enough on the topic to finally grasp it. Thanks to the
Show More
crystal clarity and masterful giving-overness of this book, I feel I am now finally able to successfully debate this topic with anyone who has chosen the devil's advocate position. If challenged, I will keep Darwin's words in mind: "Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge: it is those who know little, and not those who know much, who so positively assert that this or that problem will never be solved by science." A thoroughly enriching book. Show Less
LibraryThing member LisCarey
This is a pretty good, and comprehensive, discussion of the evidence for evolution, in ways we don't always get it in reports of the latest new findings and the conclusions that scientists have reached.
Coyne's goal is to explain, clearly and thoroughly, how we know evolution is real and factual,
How bacteria demonstrate evolution, the ways we can demonstrate evolution in plants, animals, and humans, are discussed. The evolution of the "camera eye" of modern mammals, including ourselves, from simpler, earlier structures, a thing Creationists and Intelligent Design advocates (the current incarnation of Creationism trying to force its way into science classrooms) have long insisted is impossible and therefore proof of an Intelligent Designer, is explained clearly and directly.
There is much, much more, and it's mostly very good.
I did have a few hiccups along the way, until I finally checked the original publication date. Original publication date 2008, twelve years ago! Of course it doesn't include everything we've learned in the last decade, and therefore has a few things "wrong." Not Coyne's fault!
It's still a good listen, and a clear, comprehensive presentation of the evidence, even if it was published twelve years ago, not two. (Always double-check those dates, if having misread the date wrong initially is going to bother you, the way it bothers me.)
Recommended.
I bought this audiobook.
Coyne's goal is to explain, clearly and thoroughly, how we know evolution is real and factual,
Show More
and amply supported by solid scientific evidence. It's not "a theory" in the popular sense of that word.How bacteria demonstrate evolution, the ways we can demonstrate evolution in plants, animals, and humans, are discussed. The evolution of the "camera eye" of modern mammals, including ourselves, from simpler, earlier structures, a thing Creationists and Intelligent Design advocates (the current incarnation of Creationism trying to force its way into science classrooms) have long insisted is impossible and therefore proof of an Intelligent Designer, is explained clearly and directly.
There is much, much more, and it's mostly very good.
I did have a few hiccups along the way, until I finally checked the original publication date. Original publication date 2008, twelve years ago! Of course it doesn't include everything we've learned in the last decade, and therefore has a few things "wrong." Not Coyne's fault!
It's still a good listen, and a clear, comprehensive presentation of the evidence, even if it was published twelve years ago, not two. (Always double-check those dates, if having misread the date wrong initially is going to bother you, the way it bothers me.)
Recommended.
I bought this audiobook.
Show Less
LibraryThing member larryerick
Very early into this book, I felt it was a bit too much like a classroom textbook for my taste, but it quickly transitioned into a master class taught by the best of teachers. It's overflowing with fascinating information strung together with solid logic. True, it never loses sight of its title's
Show More
purpose, justifying why evolution is true and creationism is a religious position, not a scientific one. But, if the creationist reader can stand to overlook the "debate", even that person can find fascination in what is included. Ultimately, the author finds himself speculating on why creationists are so uncomfortable with the overwhelming evidence of evolution. I invite the future readers to come to their own conclusions, because ultimately, the lack of acceptance, in my mind, comes from a lack of openness to all the world around them, not just what someone tells them to see or not see. And we can't make someone see something they don't want to see. Show Less
LibraryThing member Oreillynsf
Provides a clear and understanding rationale for belief in evolution, in a non screamy way that is welcome in a "debate" that has gotten ridiculous. As someone who knows the difference between science and religion, I find the political discussion absurd, but reading this book made it clearer why I
Show More
believe what I do. But all this is from my view that there is evidence for evolution, and there is belief in creation. The challenge here is how to keep science and religion separate, for both sides are too quick to make forays into the other. That's why I respect this book. Show Less
LibraryThing member calmclam
Very accessible and well-researched. Coyne goes into great detail about the different mechanisms for evolution and the evidence for them. As a liberal arts major with some (mostly informal) background in evolution, I found him very easy to follow and very interesting to read.
LibraryThing member nmarun
WARNING: This book has the potential to make you start thinking like an Evolutionist.
I have read a couple other books on the same subject, but this one takes a deep-dive into the intricacies of various species. The entire book is very readable and there are quite a few 'WOW' moments I had while
Two chapters - How Sex Drives Evolution and What About Us, are what I found to be the most interesting ones.
3.6 million years ago Lucy stood on her legs and hence today I'm able to write this review. I've read about Lucy before, so it was nice recalling of her.
I have read a couple other books on the same subject, but this one takes a deep-dive into the intricacies of various species. The entire book is very readable and there are quite a few 'WOW' moments I had while
Show More
going through it.Two chapters - How Sex Drives Evolution and What About Us, are what I found to be the most interesting ones.
3.6 million years ago Lucy stood on her legs and hence today I'm able to write this review. I've read about Lucy before, so it was nice recalling of her.
Show Less
LibraryThing member veranasi
Pretty good! Not super-condescending, and relatively free of jargon. Coyne has no issue with addressing the problems of evolution, which is something a lot mainstream evolutionists won't do. His thorough attack on evolutionary psychologists in chapter nine is pretty fantastic!
LibraryThing member gers1978
An important book. Should be taught in every school the world over.
LibraryThing member TheCrow2
A little simple and basic for me but 'Why evolution is true' still is a great introduction and a must read to everyone who interested in evolution and to those dumbhead creationists who don't believe in a fact....
LibraryThing member Devil_llama
A thorough review of the evidence for evolution, written in eloquent, interesting prose. The author makes his case very thoroughly. A must read for anyone who is sitting on the fence, or who thinks that all ideas about the origin of complex life are equally valid.
LibraryThing member Guide2
Good review of the theories behind evolution with lots of interesting examples. A bit repetitive a times, but overall quite enjoyable.
Awards
Royal Society Trivedi Science Book Prize (Longlist — 2010)
Language
Original language
English
Original publication date
2009
Physical description
320 p.; 6.3 inches
ISBN
0670020532 / 9780670020539
Local notes
DF