Science Nature Books

In the beginning of Wonderful Life, Gould writes:

"Words, of course, must be varied, if only to eliminate any jargon and phraseology that would mystify anyone outside the priesthood, but conceptual depth should not vary at all between professional publications and general exposition. I hope that this book can be read with profit both in seminars for graduate students and-- if the movie stinks and you forgot your sleeping pills-- on the businessman's special to Tokyo."

I am not qualified to discuss whether it should be taught in graduate seminars. I am more qualified to discuss reading it on a plane, since that is exactly where I did read the book. I think for my audience type, at least, he hits the mark.

I resisted the book quite a bit in the beginning. Honestly, reading it felt a little bit like homework. The casual reader needs to pick his or her way through a variety of classifications and discussions on methodology in order to begin to understand the point(s) of the book. Once I stopped resisting and got through the necessary definition chapters, I found that I really enjoyed the book and felt as though I learned a great deal about something which I had earlier known very little.

Gould's points are both about the remnants found in the Burgess Shale and, more largely, about the role of history and bias in interpreting data. Walcott is a fascinating character, and Gould is by turns both critical and affectionate about his nature and work.

I understand that there is quite a bit of debate regarding Gould's ideas-- many people taking notion with the contingency vs. ecology discussion. I'm not arrogant enough to join that discussion. It is worth noting to future readers that although this book is by most accounts a classic in its area, it is dated and there have been a number of corrections and revisions over the years.

Recommended. At least, I liked it.

I READ THIS BOOK WHEN CAME OUT YEARS AGO. NOW YOU CAN GET IT AT AMAZON AS A BARGAIN BOOK. THIS WONDERFUL STORY TELLS ABOUT AN ALTERNATE EARTH THAT NEVER MADE IT. SOMETHING DESTROYED IT UTTERLY. AND WONDERFUL LIFE FOUGHT BACK AND WITH TIME BECAME GIANT ANIMALS ROAMING THE LANDS OF THE EARTH. THE K-T EVENT. WACKED AGAIN! BUT LIFE ENDURED AND BECAME US...

READING THIS BEATS WATCHING THE FLUFF ON SATELLITE AND CABLE. AND IT MAKES YOU THINK. IT HELPS YOU PUT TWO AND TWO TOGETHER TO ARRIVE AT YOU!

Burgess Shale is the most important find ever of remains of early animal life on earth. Stephen Jay Gould explains why, and also why it took almost seventy years before the true significance of this treasure trove began to dawn upon the scientific world. In Gould's view, the 1970's reappraisal of the Burgess Shale fossils represents no less than a Copernical revolution in thinking about the way life on earth has evolved. While this may be, or may not be the case, the tale of how this reappraisal came about is thrillingly and competently told.

As a complete layman in the field of paleontology, I found the insets, explaining the basics and the terminology of the science very helpful. The beautiful drawings by Marianne Collins also helped me a lot to get a feel of what the amazing creatures of Burgess Shale must have been like while living.

The tale of how three British paleontologists, through their work on the fossils, arrived, much to their own surprise, upon conclusions very different from Walcott's (who first discovered Burgess Shale) is a captivating one. Gould's analysis of why Walcott in his time could not possibly have seen his find in it's true light, is something I could have done without.

But then, even if this part holds less interest for me than the main story, were it not for social obligations, I would have finished this book in one sitting!

Heartily recommended for all interested in the history of life on earth.

This book is quoted so often in the literature that I thought I was going to read something profound. It isn't. Conway Morris and others were right to criticize it. Not sure what all the fuss is about. As a well reasoned argument Gould missed the mark.

I am a fan of science and have enjoyed reading many recent books by great authors like Carl Sagan, Richard Leakey, Tim Flannery, Richard Dawkins and Jared Diamond. For some reason I hadn't had the chance to get around to reading a book by the legendary Stephen Jay Gould. Therefore, when I purchased my copy of his book entitled Wonderful Life: The Burgess Shale and the Nature of History, I was very excited and couldn't wait to read it. I was aware that before Gould's passing he was a promoter of science and that he was well known. However, I must confess I was extremely disappointed by this book. The first few chapters started off quite good, however, as the book progresses into the desciptions of the creatures of the Burgess Shale, I felt it becomes comes quite technical. Also, unlike the previous authors I mentioned, Gould seems to offer little in the way of explanations of some of the biological terminology that he uses in the book. Therefore, I feel that this book may be well suited for a person with a complex understanding of biology or palaeontology, however, it is not well suited for the lay person, or even a person with a slightly better than average understanding of these study areas.

Without doubt the best overview of our changing climate so far. This is a fact-based, agenda-free, clearly written assessment of where we are at. If read, I can almost guarantee you'll come away with a new or more compelling insight, no matter what side you are starting from. All you need is a modicum of intellect and curiosity. Read it Sen. Inhofe!!

There is so much material in this well written, concise book that there is some danger it can overwhelm you. Pearce has a gift for conveying understanding without technical language, and is always interesting, so you will not get bogged down if you do not get overwhelmed. You do not even need much of a scientific background. I had to review carbon cycle (Wikipedia was great), but that is very atypical of Pearce's effort.

The point of the book is that climate in the past has changed dramatically over decades, or less, and while we know a lot, there is so much uncertainty in our climate modeling, and so many factors at play, that the "consensus" projections are conservative, almost best case scenarios. So far we have been lucky since carbon dioxide levels are at record highs, at least for the last 55 million years, and we sure would not want to be living in the climate of 55 million years ago when a "sudden" release of methane caused widespread species extinctions. Ice is melting faster than originally expected, as scientists discover new mechanisms which are likely to accelerate this melt, even if worldwide temperatures rise no faster than expected. In fact, one of the things that impressed me is that AVERAGE worldwide temperature need not change that much for there to be catastrophic side effects: major changes in ocean levels of course, but also major continental changes in weather conditions, including long term drought, and almost ice age cooling in large parts of the northern hemisphere while the tropical and southern hemispheres are getting warmer.

The instigator of climate change in the past, before the man made increase in carbon dioxide levels, has been the sun. In the first billion years of earth's existence, the sun emitted half the solar radiation it does today, and 500 million years ago it was 10% less. There are regular cycles of changes in the amount of solar energy reaching the earth due to cyclic changes in earth's orbit and tilt. Recently, another cycle averaging about 1500 years has been discovered, traceable to cycles in the amount of solar radiation emitted. The variability in solar energy reaching earth during these various cycles is not that great in itself, it is the feedback mechanisms which vastly exaggerate the effects: earth's climate is a very unstable system

Best book I have read on Global Warming (so far: as of summer 2008) and I have read more than a few good ones. This is the most up to date, comprehensive review of every significant aspect of global warming for the general public that I have read. All that you need to know and well organized review of a very complicated subject. This is where I would begin. It emphasizes the abrupt changes that are likely to occur in all weather predictions. Does NOT cover the intricacies of computer modeling. It does NOT cover the findings from the 4th IPCC but it covers the ground up to that point thoroughly. Pearce is the environmental writer for New Scientist and I would go to his articles for the latest since the publication of this book. My only qualms is that for a book of this quality the publisher should pull out all stops for the next edition and include graphs and maps and an annotated bibliography for those wishing to do further study without necessarily going to the original sources. I expect this could become the standard reference for high school and college intro courses.

According to Dutch scientist Paul Crutzen, sometime in last two centuries the Earth left the relatively benign holocene and plunged into the uncharted waters of the anthropocene. "A single species is in charge of the planet," writes science journalist Fred Pearce, "altering its features almost at will."

While dyed-in-the-wool climate change skeptics such as columnist George Will continue to deny that Earth's climate and biological support systems are changing in response to human impacts such as surging greenhouse gases, deforestation, and ocean acidification, Pearce leapfrogs beyond them, and even beyond many mainstream climate scientists to detail the many ways in which Earth's systems are being pushed to the brink of tipping points, any one of which could have massive, irreversible impacts.

Among those tipping points:

Vanishing arctic ice. Instead of reflecting most of the sun's energy back into space, increasing areas of water will absorb the heat, potentially creating a runaway warming at Earth's high latitudes.

Ice sheets in Greenland and in the antarctic. As scientists learn more about how rapidly surface meltwater can cascade down to lubricate the beds of glaciers, massive loss of ice cover and massive sea level rises appear more likely.

Deforestation changes one of Earth's major carbon sinks to an enormous carbon source.

Enormous amounts of greenhouse gases that have been locked up in permafrost are starting to bubble out, creating another vicious cycle.

The same could easily happen with the vast quantitites of extremely potent greenhouse gas methane that until now has been locked up in heat-sensitive seabed deposits.

The ocean conveyer belt that distributes heat from the tropics could be overwhelmed by an influx of fresh water from increased rainfall and melting ice, and stall, bringing northern Europe's relatively benign climate to an abrupt end.

What is predictable, Pearce argues, is that human activities have pushed Earth's climate system from the relatively stable and predictable holocene to the precipice of a new, unstable, rapidly changing, and unpredictable epoch.

If governments, businesses and individuals are having a hard time coming to grips with the kind of gradual warming, slow sea-level rises, and somewhat increased climate variability predicted by mainstream climatogists, represented by the IPCC, what can we expect if we need to respond to the threat or reality of vast and sudden climate changes?

If you agree that forewarned is forearmed, please read this book, and soon!

With Speed and Violence: why Scientists Fear Tipping Points In Climate Change
By Fred Pearce
July 13, 2008

Mr Pearce works for New Scientist and has published several books on this subject including Turning Up The Heat way back in 1989. Here he looks at all the Doomsday scenarios out there, the ones we have all heard about: Gulf Stream shutting down, Greenland melting suddenly, the Amazon drying up, etc.

To his credit has been around a while and knows the players -- Hansen, Broeker, et. al. This gives him access where others might not get it. He has also been around scientists long enough to develop their trait of hedging their conclusions with a lot of maybes, possiblies, this suggests.

To his discredit he has abandoned most of the restraints here. Maybe (heh) he feels he has to in order to make his point, that he has to scare us into action. This reveals his reason for writing the book. He is not here to teach us but to get us on board, to prod us into action. His final chapter is his list of things we must do:


Adopt efficient appliances;
Improve automotive efficiency;
Increase use of public transport;
Effect a 50-fold increase in wind;
A 50-fold increase in biofuels;
A global program of insulating our buildings;
Cover an area the size of New Jersey with solar panels;
Effect a 4-fold increase in our use of natural gas for generating electricity;
Capture and store 1,600 gW-worth of carbon;
Halt deforestation;
Double nuclear power capacity;
Increase low-till/no-till agriculture times 10.

The few changes I would make to this list are to the nuclear part (bad idea for now) and the New Jersey part (why not just go ahead and cover New Jersey itself?) The rest make good sense in general terms. If we all use less we will experience an increase in efficiency which will give us room to grow without fouling our own nest. Our individual bills will go down, too.

One big problem I have with his text is his consistent conversion of square meters to square feet. The measurements are taken in the metric system and values of, say, solar output are quantified in terms of watts per square meter. Every time a square meter comes up, he writes it as 10.8 square feet. Is this because New Scientist is a British magazine? Then why not use BTU per square foot? It is because no one measures it that way. Moreover, a watt is a metric unit, one joule per second. A calorie will raise the temperature of 1 gram of water 1 degree centigrade; a BTU will raise the temperature of 1 pound of water 1 degree Fahrenheit. Thus, watt per square foot is a hybrid unit, like combining Greek and Latin into a phrase -- it just isn't done. His fear of writing the word "meter" in a book for the English-speaking world is misplaced. It makes him look silly and besides makes it more difficult for the reader, with his obscure "watts per 10.8 square feet".

Another lesser problem is the hyperbolic language. I don't need or want to be scared. I am a practicing atmospheric scientist so I actually prefer the kind of understatement I find in the journals. They leave it to the reader to draw their own conclusion, they don't tell you what to think about what you've just read. I am not the typical audience.

Nonetheless I side with Carl Sandburg: we should take it easy on "that old anvil, the people." We The People are tossed this way and that by the experts, all wanting some kind of action on our part. "If you knew what I know, you'd feel like I do," seems to be behind the idea that "the public must be educated on this." For me, our ignorance outweighs our knowledge on this subject by about 10 to 1.

We are just starting to probe the truth. Let's wait until the facts are a little better-established before we go around saying the sky is falling. I'm not talking about where the carbon came from or how to decrease it. I'm talking about the climate. Yes, the carbon is there and, yes, we should reduce it simply for efficiency's sake. Waste is bad, this seems obvious to my engineering brain.

But I can guarantee that climate change will be neither speedy nor violent. Weather can be observed but climate had to be invented, sort of like motherhood and fatherhood. By definition climate is a long-term matter. You can't say it has changed until a long period of time has passed. Currently we use 30-year normals updated every 10 years. This is not speedy. Climate is never violent. Is an average temperature of 75F "violent?" How is an average annual rainfall of 35 inches "violent?" See what I'm saying? Climate is a statistical concept.

Rather, it is the weather that is often speedy and violent. This blending of weather and climate is becoming a real problem. They are not the same! This brings me to my final point. Any meteorologist knows all about models. Our models are vital for our business. Note I said "models" in plural. I consult half a dozen synoptic-scale models, a few regional- or meso-scale models as well as different conceptual models every day. Ordinarily they do not agree. One says the storm will go left, the other right. One calls for intensification, the other weakening. Every model has its weakenesses and biases.

One thing we all learn in this trade is not to "jump on it." If a model has something interesting on Day 6, just note it for now, there is plenty of time to wait and see if it is still there tomorrow for Day 5. When it gets to Day 3 we can start to mention it and adjust our probabilities, slowly at first, just nudge them in the right direction. The climate modelers need to learn this. Every graduate student seemingly has his own model these days and when he tweeks an interesting result, publishes. Soon it is in the news and the public is set up for another whipsaw when it turns out not to be true. This is called "yo-yoing" in our forecasts and we avoid it by being conservative.

A model is just a model. What good does it do to know that temperatures world-wide will increase by 3.5F? This is a meaningless statistic. What is needed is a plausible physical mechanism whereby that statistic is turned into actual weather on the ground. Here is an example: let the air temperature over the Gulf Stream in my front yard increase by 3.5F. Now what? Well, since e-sub-s has increased, relative saturation will decrease and net evaporation from the water surface will increase. This will tend to cool the surface waters to the new wet-bulb temperature, which has increased by maybe half the total amount, say 1.75F. So we have the air 3.5 warmer and the sea surface 1.75 warmer -- the air has warmed more than the sea surface. Therefore static stability in the column has increased over the water and hence we would expect to see less cloudiness at sea by day. At night when the air cools a little, stability will decrease and cloudiness will increase. All this is exactly as observed today. The cloud fraction is small over the sea during the day and is a maximum around surise when we also experience a slight but noticeable peak in our hourly rainfall. So my simple model predicts sunnier days with more sunrise showers, along with a temperature increase that is strongly moderated by the nearby water mass -- not 3.5F but 1.75F. Why does no one talk in this straightforward way? Where is the violence here?

These connections are mostly missing in the climate models. We need to know more before we can say what it means.

Enough! Read more on the topic, educate yourself, decide for yourself what is right and good. Take no one's word. The climate experts are guessing when it comes to the weather.

Follows the new IB Biology syllabus PERFECTLY, so if you study from here you're sure to get ALL the details you need to know for the exam. the information is written clearly and it's not only just plain text, it's got articles and also additional material and information that's interesting to read. there are also review questions at the end of each chapter (one negative point is that the answer section just covers these questions, not the ones that are found throughout the book like in every single page, but I guess the book would be ten times bigger if it answered all of them). highly recomend it :)

I was very disappointed upon receipt of this book. I needed a good source for my coursework and to study from, and this was not at all what I needed. It does not even cover all of the IB Syllabus assessment statements, I firmly recommend "Biology for the IB Diploma" instead.

The Oxford IB Diploma Programme Biology Course companion is incredibly helpful. It raised my test scores greatly and it's a great supplement tool to the course.

This course companion has proved immensly helpful in my studies. For every topic I personally have encountered, it fully explain all statements from the syllabus - though my experience seems to differ greatly from that of the other reviewer. Additionally, the book provides the slight amount of depth needed to understant the topics as opposed to simply memorize terms.

Perhaps the most helpful feature, however, is the short quiz/review at the end of each section. The questions are IB-style and provide insight about whether you have fuilly comprehended the material.

Altogther, I would highly reccomend this book to any IB student, escpecially one who has struggled (as I have) in a class they have always done well in in the past. It is an excellent additional resource and quite worthy of its cost.

A+ !

I rarely read fiction and the initial premise of Ecotopia involving the Pacific NW region seceding from the US seemed somewhat far fetched but I was pleasantly surprised by the novel. Callenbach's richly-descriptive portrait of a society based on the concept of a "stable-state" ecosystem was quite thought-provoking. This is similar to the economist Herman Daly's advocacy of steady-state economics. It also parallels Robert Costanza's work in the emerging discipline of Ecological Economics as an alternative to the outdated, ideology-driven concepts of neoclassical economic theory. The centerpiece of the Ecotopia social model is for resource consumption to never exceed sustainable resource limits and to also treat pollution and waste as costs that are not externalized to the commons but are factored into economic decision-making at a fundamental level. Resources are recycled whenever possible and durable low-technology generally takes precedence over high-technology. Ecotopians generally embrace a philosophy of ecological intertwinement and reverence for nature. I see some similarities to James Lovelock's "Gaia hypothesis" and Edward O. Wilson's concept of "Biophilia".
I found the descriptions of the personalities and behaviors of the various characters throughout the novel to be quite entertaining, the women in particular having a more dominant role. Ecotopians are passionate if not quirky. The Ecotopians adopt a neomalthusian approach toward population regulation and this particularly resonated with me since I consider overpopulation and its resultant resource scarcity to be the single most critical issue facing the human species. The chapter on the ritual war games was intriguing and raises significant issues regarding the genetic predisposition toward competitive aggression in males. I was hoping to find some direct references to behavior science and the use of positive reinforcement but I didn't really find any though an Ecotopian model would provide more positive rewards as part of daily life.
Overall, Ecotopia is quite a stimulating read and I'm glad to add it to my small library. The novel is filled with creative approaches to a wide variety of social issues some of which probably aren't feasible but interesting none the less. Two other related books that some might find interesting are "The Collapse of Complex Societies" by the archaeologist Joseph Tainter and "Environment, Scarcity and Violence" by Thomas Homer-Dixon who heads the Conflict Studies department at the University of Toronto.
The mindless waste and hyper consumption of contemporary American culture is simply unsustainable. If I could move somewhere that embraced at least some of the aspects of the Ecotopian model I'd probably do so.

In 1980, the states of Washington, Oregon (probably only the western halves - the eastern halves of both states are socially conservative) and Northern California secede from the USA and build an ecological utopia, complete with recycling, alternative energy, a virtual ban on the ICE, and Native American chic. Their government policies stand in relation to the election platforms of Ralph Nader and Dennis Kucinich as the platforms of Nader and Kucinich stand in relation to George W. Bush's policies. For a few years I went to an Internet forum, one of the participants of which was a teacher of wicca and a community activist from Portland, OR with a rather authoritarian personality, who attacked people who advocated scientific rigor in public policy or expressed dislike of the work of her friend Ursula Kroeber Le Guin. She was incensed when somebody called Hillary Clinton "a left-wing politician": the real left-wingers are bell hooks, Barbara Ehrenreich (she gave a few more names that I cannot recollect at the moment). This book reminded me of her, for in Ecotopia, people like her would be in power. Yet while reading Ecotopia, just as when I was reading Edward Bellamy's Looking Backwards, I had the feeling that to some extent, I am living in this utopia, since the political movements that produced the two utopias, ecology in the 1970s and socialism in the 1890s, influenced the culture of this country in various ways.

When I first began reading _Ecotopia_ (1975) several years ago, I remember thinking that the basic premise-- that Washington, Oregon, and Northern California could successfully secede from the United States-- was far fetched. But Callenbach has written a "prequel," _Ecotopia Emerging_ (1981), which dramatizes how the revolution occurred. You may or may not find the details of that revolution plausible. But the point is this: Callenbach's utopia does not exist in a vacuum. It has a historical background. You feel that under the right circumstances, it _could_ become a reality. It feels solid.

Let us dispense with a few weaknesses to the novel. First, it uses the Visitor to Utopia plot, which is as old as Thomas More and which is by this time fairly predictable. I hope that readers will not rise up in wrath when I reveal that the hard-headed reporter who enters Ecotopia eventually becomes converted to the Ecotopian way of life. Second, Callenbach is frequently guilty of loading the dice in favor of his society. (The Ecotopians are healthier than most Americans, crime is almost nonexistent, and the sex in Ecotopia is just so doggoned much _better_.) A third problem is that much of what goes on in Ecotopia depends on its being isolated from the rest of the world. For example, hunting, woodcraft, and carpentry are taught as major parts of the school curriculum. This makes a certain amount of sense if your purpose is to give children an education in practical skills that they will need in their own society. But shouldn't education cover content areas that go beyond the boundaries of your own country?

On the other hand, there are some definite strengths to the novel. The narrator, a journalist named William Weston, is intelligent, observant, and engaging. (Many utopian visitors are rather wooden-headed.) His observations of Ecotopia, told in a series of journal and notebook entries from May 3 through June 25, are clear, concrete, and relaxed in style. The novel is, in fact, remarkably easy to read. Well, what are some of the characteristics of the society that Weston is exploring?

First, the technology is-- selective. It has been used to develop elaborate recycling systems, from sophisticated sewer systems to recycling trucks and centers to the use and re-use of biodegradable plastics. Gasoline cars have been outlawed in favor of electric cars, magnetic monorails, and public bicycles. Some electronic equipment (can openers, hair curlers, skillets) are absent, but others (television, videophones, refrigerators) are present. If this seems a bit "low tech" to some readers, remember: It is the task of the utopian author to construct a society that can be built using present-day technology. Utopias based on lots of fantastic, futuristic devices are not, ultimately, believable.

Second, Ecotopia has become more rural and less urban. To be sure, there are still cities such as San Francisco. But there is less urban sprawl (many old business skyscapers have been converted to apartments), more parks and gardens, and less smog (since petroleum cars have been banned). Many people are living in small communities, and the population in Ecotopia has gradually diminished through the use of birth control. Woodlands and farmlands have spread, and many Ecotopians are now forest rangers or cowboys. Dams have been demolished to return rivers to their natural state. Power comes from solar plants, sea power, and a few fusion plants. Animals have returned in great numbers to Ecotopia, and controlled hunting is encouraged.

Third, there has been a breaking away from the Protestant work ethic and large group activities. There is a twenty hour work week, factories are run on an informal basis rather than in an assembly-line manner. Work crews and volunteers for chores do their tasks in an unhurried, gamelike manner. Citizens are encouraged to spend time doing arts and crafts. Individual sports, such as hiking or camping, are encouraged, while spectator sports, such as baseball or football, are virtually nonexistent. As Weston notes, the sports pages in Ecotopia make rather dull reading. But more citizens are physically fit.

Finally, there are the dark-- or at least more controversial aspects-- of Ecotopia. The citizens are direct, emotional, and loudly argumentative. They frequently engage in lover's quarrels and family disputes, and they are often taking sides in a discussion over the quality of food in a restaurant or in political debates. There is also a strong Survivalist element in Ecotopia, and many citizens engage in aggressive war games. (Some Ecotopians may be druidic tree-huggers, but they are _not_ sentimental and weak.) The nuclear family is gradually giving way to communal families. Most blacks have chosen to live in voluntary "city states" in the Oakland area, indicating a kind of _de facto_ separation of racial cultures. Opposition leaders who want closer relations with the United States are an underground movement. They are quickly squashed by the government. One wonders how much freedom of speech is really allowed in this society.

Yet I find, somewhat to my surprise, that I wouldn't mind living in Ecotopia. Our current government is so corrupt, so incompetent, so cowardly, and so little concerned with public welfare that Ecotopia seems wonderful by comparison. This is how utopian satire works. You say, "If this imaginary world, with all its faults, looks good... then what are we to say about the world in which we live?"

After reading "Utopias on Puget Sound," I was hooked on the history and all things utopia. I would bet that most people in Washington state and British Columbia would love to form a new country, but alas, we can dream about what life might be like if the west coast were to break away and start an ecotopia.

This novel is a mixed bag, and it's stayed with me for some time since I first read it. On the plus side, I found the book an easy, wonderfully quick read, and a pretty good exercise of world-building. I also found much to like in Ecotopia's vision, such as its environmental policies and progressive educational system, etc.

BUT...there is something decidedly specious about the ideals represented in the book, and in truth it was sometimes hard to tell if Callenbach was being sincere or satirical. Valid objections about the Ecotopian timeline aside, as well as its obvious hippy vintage, Ecotopia's almost enforced diversity--albeit in a non-bourgeois lifestyle--passive-aggression, and occasional totalitarian structure make even a tree-hugging, bleeding-heart liberal like me raise an eyebrow. Ecotopia sounds like a place that's better than Hell, but still ten floors below Heaven.

Recommended, but with a grain of salt; definitely not a play-book for the perfect society.

It would be good for the theology student to play with, but I didn't really care for it too much.

Enough with the editing and correcting the language usage of these wonderful people...why take away from their culture and natural use of language...why should I read about mountain people when their speech patterns are corrected?...I might as well read any old book about growing apples anywhere...give me back the language of Foxfire 1.

Excellent resource for curriculum unit on social insects, ants, cooperation for pk-k.

I like to see what is on the bookshelfs for youngsters regarding paranormal topics. I loved to read these books as a kid. I was hoping to see some higher quality books by this time, some 30 years later. I'm not too impressed. This book is very disappointing. The only plus is the wealth of pictures that are interesting and should capture attention. The authors state these creatures were "investigated". The list of references used is abysmally short. Most of what is given is regurgitated from older books including misconceptions or mistakes just carried over once again. The authors give us the "Who knows?" attitude. We do know some things. We do have evidence. This is not a fair assessment - it's a view of what they wish were true. The path here leads only to more mystery, no answers. Sections start with pieces of fantastic fictional "what ifs" and end with a false dichotomy - either this animal does or doens't exist. Those aren't the only two options. Misidentification is not addressed well. I'm looking for something more balanced, more science- and evidence-based. This is NOT it.

This is probably the best book out there for giving the facts, the fables, and the fiction of Bigfoot and his cryptic gang. It's perfect for a family conversation about what's real and what's still a mystery, a subject sure to come up when the Cartoon Network's newest animated series, Secret Saturdays, starts in October. In fact, this book was used by the cartoon's creators for research and inspiration!

That was my 4 year old niece's reaction after I read her this book. I
got it for her on a whim, since she's interested in Bigfoot and the
Loch Ness Monster. She absolutely loved it. Recommended.

I bought this book for my 10 year old nephew, who, despite all the super electronic gizmos competing for attention at Christmas, took this one up to bed Christmas Eve, and couldn't put it down. Neither could his father, or his 8 year old brother. And I read it before I gave it to him. Very well-researched and balanced with an enquiring approach to the whole subject of Cryptids. Many thanks to the authors for another excellent book that gets kids to unplug from the computer, read a book and get their brains in gear.

I am always on the prowl for books that will excite my eight-year-old sons, particularly if they don't have to do with underpants or wizards. With apologies to Dav Pilkey and J.K. Rowling, both of whom write fantastic books, I need a little variety. And so I was ecstatic to find TALES OF THE CRYPTIDS on the new non-fiction shelf in the library children's room. So ecstatic, in fact, that I kept the book hidden in my office until I had a chance to sit down and read it myself. It is fabulous, fabulous, fabulous (that's one for each of the book's three co-creators).

This meaty middle-grade non-fiction title takes readers on an adventure in cryptozoology. "Crypto-What?" asks the opening chapter title. Cryptozoology, "the study of and searching for legendary animals--called cryptids--to find out if there's any possibility that these mysterious animals people say they've seen really exist." From Bigfoot to the Loch Ness Monster to prehistoric cryptids you may never have heard of, this book tells readers what is true, what is not, and what scientists just can't be sure about.

In addition to being plain interesting, the book is designed well and is illustrated with a nice blend of photographs and drawings. The authors include a "Reality Index" to help readers tease hoaxes from reality as well as a thorough bibliography of books, articles and web sites for readers who want to continue their cryptid studies. I love that the authors had the courage to turn an objective eye to a fabulously interesting topic that happens to be fraught with doubt and disbelief. The result is a book that helps young readers to realize that all scientific investigation, cryptozoology included, requires a careful balance of skepticism and open-mindedness.

This is a great book that should be read. Morris is a very intelligent guy, and a very good writer, and you'll be able to polish this book off with no trouble.

One caveat is that the book is over forty-one years old, and so some of the conclusions/assertions/asseverations may be obsolete (and many more "politically incorrect")...but most, I'd imagine, still hold true. Evolution tends to take a while...one need look no further than the nearest mirror. Morris makes some dated predictions, and overreaches on a few, but nothing on a Paul Ehrlich-level of hyperbolic nonsense.

Many clever insights are provided throughout the book, shining an etiological bulb on numerous aspects of naked ape culture and behavior. Morris's articulated reasoning for the invention and continuation of religion in an allegedly rationalistic age was novel to me (though intuitively obvious--after the fact!), and his explication of how some traits have developed out of conjunction with our evolutionary time-frame (while anachronistic others remain sticky long after they've ceased being useful) is truly food for thought.

I recommend The Naked Ape highly, with the proviso, alluded to earlier, that certain folks holding certain orthodoxies probably won't find their cherished faiths reinforced, and thus will react with hostility.

A stirring look at the primal factors driving man in the art of Love, the doldrums of Work and the visceral depths of War and chronicling our relative similarity to our closest cousins, the primates, Desmond Morris adds soil and soul to the grassroots movement sparked in the Sixties counterculture to reconnect with some bygone artifact of Man's blind past. There can be no doubt that the embattled Sixties and the embittered youthful revolts influenced Morris to direct his scientific acumen at the internal drive of Man.

Overall, this is a good start for those questioning just how biological many of Man's drives are.

I had to read this for a psychology class. As I am not a psych. major, it wasn't my idea of fun reading. I found it really difficult to get totally into the book as I usually do when reading. It was slow reading. However, there were many insights that the author made that I found very interesting.

This book is great to read. Whether you believe what's been written or not, not-so-religious people can't deny evolution. It's as simple as 1+1=2 and that's how this book has been written.

You believe what I just said? Grab a copy of the book now!

Don't believe me? Good, as I don't buy into everything that has been said as well. But I do think it's important that the more views you have, the better your fundamentent for judgement is. This book certainly has some very strong points and may sound familiar to you.

So, just with psychology and Dr. Phil, don't believe everything that's being said, but make up your own mind. Maybe this book will be 'a changing day in your life...'.

If you are interested in a 1950-60's view of human evolutionary science, this book may be worthwhile. Otherwise, don't waste your time. Evolutionary science has advanced dramatically in the last 50 years and has discredited many of the views presented in The Naked Ape. Several are even laughable, such as the explanation of homosexuality in the chapter on sex.

Further, while promoted as a zoological study, the presentation is psychological, focusing on behavioral issues and their explanations rather than biological evolution. It is filled with the "he-man hunter" psychobabel that was preached in 1960's university Psych courses.

Simply, this book was a waste of my time and money. The reviews that stated the book was dated, but still relevant, were sadly mistaken.

I've walked in Israel and the West Bank before the Intifadas, before the barriers, and subsequently tried to make some sense of the mistakes and the historical horror show that has occurred. I think that the Arabic term "al Naqba", the catastrophe, truly best states what has happened, and what continues for all those who live there.
For everyone who shares the author's love of the land or has any respect for human dignity, this book will make you despair over the tragedy of it all.
Some books on the subject have challenged me, all have upset me, but none have effected me as viscerally as these personal ruminations on the irretrievable loss of the landscape itself.
It's beautifully written. Read it and weep.

I have just made arrangements to go to Palestine and experience walks in Palestine in the midst of a brutal occupation! This is how powerful this book!

This book is a must have for all wetland researchers, managers, scientists, and anyone with a general interest in wetland ecosystems. If I had to choose 1 wetland book, this is it. It is one of THE most popular textbooks for university wetland courses and workshops. I have been a wetland scientist for almost 15 years, and this is one of the books I use on a regular basis, and recommend to all my assistants and students. Wetland researchers will also want to keep in mind that with the release of the 4th edition, this 3rd edition is still a must have in your wetland library. The 4th edition removed all the wetland ecosystem specific chapters that are in this edition, so this edition is far from outdated. Don't choose one over the other! Buy them both :).

The Mitsch & Gosselink Wetlands 4th edition arrived promptly and in very good condition as was claimed it would by the seller.

This book is very helpful in understanding the various aspects and dynamics relating to wetlands. It includes management, legal, and various other topics of importance to wetland biologists, wildlife students or researchers working in wetland delineation or consultation.

There is no better book for learning about wetlands that I have found. Many students find hydrology difficult, but this book lays this critical process out clearly, with excellent illustrations and diagrams.

This book helps the biotic oriented student understand the abiotic processes in clear and simple language.

I will never part with my copy, and reference it often!

Overall, this is a very good text on wetlands (for students and professionals both). However, I personally feel that a entire chapter could be devoted to wetland soils and wish that this book gave a better presentation of wetland soils. Furthermore, a great deal of research has been performed in Boreal wetlands and Boreal Prairie wetlands of Canada yet the Canadian literature is somewhat lacking in this text. Its still the best option out there for professors.