The Greatest Show On Earth

The Mad Hatter

Didn't know this was out yet - it's on special offer in Waterstones (or at least in Waterstones on Good Bookshop St.) for less than a tenner.

I've read a few extracts online, and the first chapter - it seems very good.

Turtwig

It's out:eek::eek:

Eh so is this just lOOK THERE EVIDENCE!!!

Or the wonders of evolution??

marco_polo

I thought this was a week from now?

* Breaks open piggy back

Actually at only a tenner I could probably stretch to getting a copy for Kevin Myers too.

Zillah

marco_polo wrote: »

Actually at only a tenner I could probably stretch to getting a copy for Kevin Myers too.

Why bother, he's probably already written a response to it. Hell, I could have written his response by now.

Galvasean

Kevin Myers wrote:

But what the emminent high priest of Atheism fails to realise is; this is not the greatest show on Earth. That honour goes to Fawlty Towers. With Dawkins having so much trouble grasping such a simple concept it is small wonder his book fails to ignite a sense of wonderment.

Not far off I'll bet.

Turtwig

Right Extracts are good,

What saddens me though is that this book is somewhat necessary in todays modern society

Anyhu, bedtime for me, eyes are burning

Dave!

aww deadly, will have to drop into Waterstones, thanks for the heads up !

Overblood

Savage Cabbage.

MrPudding

Sweet. Will have it tomorrow, god bless you amazon... er I mean um, way to go amazon!

MrP

Dades

Mad Hatter - to clarify - this book is out and available in Waterstones?

All stores or just the one you were in?

The Mad Hatter

Dades wrote: »

Mad Hatter - to clarify - this book is out and available in Waterstones?

All stores or just the one you were in?

The book is out, yes, and I got it in Waterstones on...er...can never remember the name of the street, but it's around the corner from Nassau St., and is the street with Waterstones and Hodges & Figgis on it (hence Good Bookshop Street).

Dawkins posted on Twitter that the book is out "today", so I have a funny feeling WS took it out of the package early.

The Mad Hatter

Malty_T wrote: »

Right Extracts are good,

What saddens me though is that this book is somewhat necessary in todays modern society

Anyhu, bedtime for me, eyes are burning

Maybe, but this book is just what I need, I think. I've read some of The Selfish Gene and found it interesting but heavy; GSOE is very straightforward, and even has illustrations and photos.

Dades

Just back from Waterstones on Dawson St - I can confirm they have stacks of them (less one) at half-price... €16.99 reduced to €8.50!

I'm wondering what the heck is all that about - but happy days nonetheless.

Tim Robbins

Dades wrote: »

Just back from Waterstones on Dawson St - I can confirm they have stacks of them (less one) at half-price... €16.99 reduced to €8.50!

I'm wondering what the heck is all that about - but happy days nonetheless.

Is it not just another book about evolution?

He's done about 8 or 9 already.

Dades

There's a name for people who read one book about where we came from and call it a day.

Tim Robbins

Dades wrote: »

There's a name for people who read one book about where we came from and call it a day.

There's also a name for people who have to keep reading about the same thing which forms their world view :-)

I have read a few of his books already. Including 'The Ancestors Tale' which took a jolly while.

I am just wondering is this just more belief massaging for the Dawkins' brigade.

Dades

I find your attitude odd, and clearly prompted by a dislike of Dawkins.

I haven't read a book concerning evolution since the Blind Watchmaker many years ago. Time and alcohol have wiped out most of what I read, and undoubtedly the science has been updated since it was published.

The Blind Watchmaker (1986) -- > The Greatest Show On Earth (2009)

Hardly fanboyism to decide to read Dawkins' latest given he is one of the most prominent writers in the realm of popular biology. Or is Dawkins just sooooo 2007?

Zombrex

Tim Robbins wrote: »

Is it not just another book about evolution?

He's done about 8 or 9 already.

Would you prefer he wrote a book about Lego?

Turtwig

Wicknight wrote: »

Would you prefer he wrote a book about Lego?

Well now, Lego happens to be the most ingenious toy in the world
That's gonna be my book:p

Tim Robbins

Dades wrote: »

I find your attitude odd, and clearly prompted by a dislike of Dawkins.

I think he's a brilliant writer but I think it's sad that all he writes about is evolution.

I haven't read a book concerning evolution since the Blind Watchmaker many years ago. Time and alcohol have wiped out most of what I read, and undoubtedly the science has been updated since it was published.

The Blind Watchmaker (1986) -- > The Greatest Show On Earth (2009)

Hardly fanboyism to decide to read Dawkins' latest given he is one of the most prominent writers in the realm of popular biology. Or is Dawkins just sooooo 2007?

I read Ancestor's Tale, The Selfish Gene, Blind WatchMaker and River out of Eden in the last 2 years. I also started another:

"Unweaving the Rainbow: Science, Delusion and the Appetite for Wonder" hoping it might be about some other aspects of Science but it was just the same old stuff about DNA, evolution and fossils.

If someone keeps saying the same thing - does it not get a bit monotonous after a while?

Other science writers, e.g. Carl Sagan would write about a wider range of topics. It's a pity Dawkins doesn't do that because he's a fantastic writer.

Tim Robbins

Wicknight wrote: »

Would you prefer he wrote a book about Lego?

There's a good analogy with lego and atoms in Sophie's World so I am sure he has brought that into his writing somewhere.

Turtwig

Tim Robbins wrote: »

I think he's a brilliant writer but I think it's sad that all he writes about is evolution.


I read Ancestor's Tale, The Selfish Gene, Blind WatchMaker and River out of Eden in the last 2 years. I also started another:

"Unweaving the Rainbow: Science, Delusion and the Appetite for Wonder" hoping it might be about some other aspects of Science but it was just the same old stuff about DNA, evolution and fossils.

If someone keeps saying the same thing - does it not get a bit monotonous after a while?

Other science writers, e.g. Carl Sagan would write about a wider range of topics. It's a pity Dawkins doesn't do that because he's a fantastic writer.

I'm with Tim on this one, Dawkins is a brilliant individual but his books seem to be trotting over the same ground again and again. I want something new, you know, about recent discoveries/theories in biology.

OT,
Yeah that lego analogy about Lego, is simply brilliant,
even if it only goes as far as protons,neutrons and electrons ....

Dades

Tim Robbins wrote: »

I read Ancestor's Tale, The Selfish Gene, Blind WatchMaker and River out of Eden in the last 2 years...

Well then you'd be forgiven for not reading his latest. I've been reading Sci-Fi for the last two years.

Tim Robbins wrote: »

If someone keeps saying the same thing - does it not get a bit monotonous after a while?

Only if you've read them.

Tim Robbins wrote: »

Other science writers, e.g. Carl Sagan would write about a wider range of topics. It's a pity Dawkins doesn't do that because he's a fantastic writer.

I don't think Dawkins has the charisma to carry it off like CS could, tbh. He too much of a frustrated scientist rather than a populariser. Carl Sagan also had the imagination.

Tim Robbins

Dades wrote: »

Well then you'd be forgiven for not reading his latest. I've been reading Sci-Fi for the last two years.

Sci - fi = yuke.
Don't know how anyone can read this genre. Glorified psuedo-science.

Dave!

Tim Robbins wrote: »

I think he's a brilliant writer but I think it's sad that all he writes about is evolution.


I read Ancestor's Tale, The Selfish Gene, Blind WatchMaker and River out of Eden in the last 2 years. I also started another:

"Unweaving the Rainbow: Science, Delusion and the Appetite for Wonder" hoping it might be about some other aspects of Science but it was just the same old stuff about DNA, evolution and fossils.

If someone keeps saying the same thing - does it not get a bit monotonous after a while?

Other science writers, e.g. Carl Sagan would write about a wider range of topics. It's a pity Dawkins doesn't do that because he's a fantastic writer.

You may find his previous book to be on a topic other than evolution..... the God Delusion......

Anyways got my copy in Eason for €18... Not quite the same bargain as Waterstones That is unless you consider €8 + €2 + €2 (bus fare each way) + €5 for the effort of having to go into town, and the lack of being able to read it tonight

= €17

Pretty much the same

Dades

Tim Robbins wrote: »

Sci - fi = yuke.
Don't know how anyone can read this genre. Glorified psuedo-science.

There are loads of types of sci-fi.

Have you read (not watched) "Contact" by Carl Sagan?

You just might like it.

marco_polo

Dave! wrote: »

You may find his previous book to be on a topic other than evolution..... the God Delusion......

Anyways got my copy in Eason for €18... Not quite the same bargain as Waterstones That is unless you consider €8 + €2 + €2 (bus fare each way) + €5 for the effort of having to go into town, and the lack of being able to read it tonight

= €17

Pretty much the same

8 Euro + ten minute walk home = 10 Euro extra for beer and ample reading time :P

The Mad Hatter

Tim Robbins wrote: »

Sci - fi = yuke.
Don't know how anyone can read this genre. Glorified psuedo-science.

Seems like a gross generalisation to me. I don't think it's wise to bracket any genre under a single umbrella.

Also, you assume that the science is the point.

The Mad Hatter

Malty_T wrote: »

Well now, Lego happens to be the most ingenious toy in the world
That's gonna be my book:p

The Selfish 4-dot Brick?

Naz_st

Tim Robbins wrote: »

Sci - fi = yuke.
Don't know how anyone can read this genre. Glorified psuedo-science.

No, it's not pseudo-science, it's science fiction - the clue is in the name!

Dades wrote: »

There are loads of types of sci-fi.

Have you read (not watched) "Contact" by Carl Sagan?

You just might like it.

Cracking book. Way better than the movie.

sink

Tim Robbins wrote: »

I think he's a brilliant writer but I think it's sad that all he writes about is evolution.

Do you realise that his profession is in evolutionary biology? I would think that Evolution is a fairly logical topic for an evolutionary biologist to write about. He could write about other topics but is probably sensible enough to not write outside of his area of expertise for want of avoiding looking foolish.

Tim Robbins

sink wrote: »

Do you realise that his profession is in evolutionary biology? I would think that Evolution is a fairly logical topic for an evolutionary biologist to write about. He could write about other topics but is probably sensible enough to not write outside of his area of expertise for want of avoiding looking foolish.

Flipping heck.
Saying anything critical of Mr. Dawkins is a kin to saying something critical of Mr. Jesus in our neighbours forum.

sink

Tim Robbins wrote: »

Flipping heck.
Saying anything critical of Mr. Dawkins is a kin to saying something critical of Mr. Jesus in our neighbours forum.

Not really, I don't share Mr. Dawkins views on religion (by that I mean his views on the organised practice of religion), which I have written several posts on before. Out of the books of his that I have read I would rate 'The God Delusion' at the very bottom. He is at his best when writing within his area of expertise 'Evolution' and to criticise him for only writing about a topic on which he is an expert and has some talent for putting across in a simple to understand manner seems to me to be silly.

Galvasean

Under a tenner you say? Is that hardbac or softback?

The Mad Hatter

Galvasean wrote: »

Under a tenner you say? Is that hardbac or softback?

Paperback.

darjeeling

sink wrote: »

Do you realise that his profession is in evolutionary biology? I would think that Evolution is a fairly logical topic for an evolutionary biologist to write about. He could write about other topics but is probably sensible enough to not write outside of his area of expertise for want of avoiding looking foolish.

Yes, indeed. At least Dawkins hasn't made the same career choice as Matt Ridley, the highly reputed author of popular science books such as 'The Red Queen' and 'Genome' who later ventured outside his chosen field to become the ill-starred chairman of Northern Rock.

marco_polo

Tim Robbins wrote: »

There's also a name for people who have to keep reading about the same thing which forms their world view :-)
.

You're not suggesting we should consider the alternatives?

I have read a few of his books already. Including 'The Ancestors Tale' which took a jolly while.

I am just wondering is this just more belief massaging for the Dawkins' brigade.

Have a read of the preface next time you are in town, I think he explains his reasons for writing the book pretty well. Basically his point is that none of his books have discussed the actual evidence for evolution, but begin on the premise of it being true.

It is almost like he was trying to preempt your question .

Galvasean

It is a good idea for a book. I've read a few books on evolution, but as Marco said, none of them went into great detail on the actual evidence which proves it to be true. This oversight (assuming everyone believes in evolution and therefore not going out of the way to prove it) may have contributed to the rise of Creationism.

Zillah

Tim Robbins wrote: »

Flipping heck.
Saying anything critical of Mr. Dawkins is a kin to saying something critical of Mr. Jesus in our neighbours forum.

What the hell is this crappy reaction? He made an absolutely relevant point. Criticising an evolutionary biologist for writing too much about evolution is pretty stupid. What are you expecting, "Dawkins Dabbles in Diving: Atheism under the sea"?

bnt

Tim Robbins wrote: »

Flipping heck.
Saying anything critical of Mr. Dawkins is a kin to saying something critical of Mr. Jesus in our neighbours forum.

It's not that you were critical, it's that you were wrong. If you want some justified criticism of Dawkins, there's plenty to go around. For example, he's said things that were totally uncalled-for, such as personal remarks about that flight attendant who wore a crucifix to work. I'm not going to buy his new book sight-unseen, I want to have a look at it first.

Dawkins writes some good books, but he's no leader - which is just fine with me, since I'm no follower. Is that the only kind of relationship the religious understand? Gods and subjects, messiahs and apostles, clergy and laity ... shepherds and sheep?

Tim Robbins

marco_polo wrote: »

You're not suggesting we should consider the alternatives?

I think there's been a range of contemporary intellectuals who have written some very good books in our time.

Peter Singer and Allan De Botton's books are usually very good and I think people who like an intellectual / rational world view would enjoy them.

Tim Robbins

Zillah wrote: »

What the hell is this crappy reaction? He made an absolutely relevant point. Criticising an evolutionary biologist for writing too much about evolution is pretty stupid. What are you expecting, "Dawkins Dabbles in Diving: Atheism under the sea"?

I think you'd find most techincal / science writers usually write about a broader range of the sciences, than what must be about 5,000 pages about the same thing.

Even, William Reville writes about many different things.
Imagine if Simon Singh just kept writing books on Fermat's last theorm?
We'd surely be entitled to point out the element of monotony.

I would have thought someone of Dawkins writing ability would have liked the challenge of writing about something different. I'm surprised he hasn't.

The Mad Hatter

Tim: Firstly, evolution (and biology generally, though there's very little difference) is a massive field, far bigger than Fermat's Last Theorem.

Secondly, as has been pointed out to you, he makes his reasons for writing the book perfectly clear in the preface, vis. that all of his other books have assumed that evolution is true as a starting point and worked from there, where this one instead presents the case for evolution and shows us what the evidence is - particularly useful for laymen such as myself.

Thirdly, just for the record, he does explain some aspects of geology and chemistry very well in the book, too.

Tim Robbins

The Mad Hatter wrote: »

Tim: Firstly, evolution (and biology generally, though there's very little difference) is a massive field, far bigger than Fermat's Last Theorem.

Secondly, as has been pointed out to you, he makes his reasons for writing the book perfectly clear in the preface, vis. that all of his other books have assumed that evolution is true as a starting point and worked from there, where this one instead presents the case for evolution and shows us what the evidence is - particularly useful for laymen such as myself.

Thirdly, just for the record, he does explain some aspects of geology and chemistry very well in the book, too.

Perhaps. I think he's just playing to his market niche. And I'd question anyone who has read 4 evolutionary of his books already if they'll learn anything of substance new.

Some people think John Grisham's books are all different, even if you just read the preface. However, after a few of them, there's a stenching element of monotony and unoriginality.

Dades

Tim Robbins wrote: »

Perhaps. I think he's just playing to his market niche. And I'd question anyone who has read 4 evolutionary of his books already if they'll learn anything of substance new.

This book I suspect is primarily aimed at those who haven't read his previous offerings. Or, like me, those that might have, but need a refresher.

Since he last wrote about evolution he's become aware of all the creationist and intelligent design bullsh*t, and how it's starting to affect real lives. As outlined in the first few pages, this book (to coincide with Darwin's 200th) is to set out the case once-and-for-all, in layman's terms why evolution is fact.

I guess he hopes to swing a few sceptics, and more importantly grab those who are just unaware of the whole tussle before some religious nut does.

Tim Robbins

Dades wrote: »

This book I suspect is primarily aimed at those who haven't read his previous offerings. Or, like me, those that might have, but need a refresher.

Since he last wrote about evolution he's become aware of all the creationist and intelligent design bullsh*t, and how it's starting to affect real lives. As outlined in the first few pages, this book (to coincide with Darwin's 200th) is to set out the case once-and-for-all, in layman's terms why evolution is fact.

I guess he hopes to swing a few sceptics, and more importantly grab those who are just unaware of the whole tussle before some religious nut does.

He loves making out there's a quasi-war with creationists alright. In fairness, it's hillarious when it's on tv but I think I find it a bit tiring reading about it again and again. If the creationists really hates science they'd never go to the Dr. but they do. They are just a bit stupid. Is it fair to expect 100% of the population to be able to think logically? It's seems much more probable that a large percentage of the population just won't have the genes to think logically. Dawkins, ironically, more than anyone should know that.

It's interesting to see how other eminent biologists approach this issue. Sean B. Carroll for example doesn't seem to engage in it the same way Dawkins does.

I think Dawkins loves whooping it up and and having some controversy which I have to say makes some great television but probably makes those he opposes even more strident then they already are.

pH

Tim Robbins wrote: »

I think Dawkins loves whooping it up and and having some controversy which I have to say makes some great television but probably makes those he opposes even more strident then they already are.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-_2xGIwQfik

Dades

Tim Robbins wrote: »

If the creationists really hates science they'd never go to the Dr. but they do. They are just a bit stupid. Is it fair to expect 100% of the population to be able to think logically?

I guess he's trying to stop stupid people 'educating' those who have never, for whatever reason, thought about the whole thing. To that end he's tried to produce the definitive book that anyone can read to counter the bullsh*t.

And all the better he uses his reputation to drum up a bit of publicity. Apathy breeds ignorance. Maybe a new bunch of people will now laugh and point at creationists in the street, where before they might have stopped to listen.

Zillah

pH wrote: »

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-_2xGIwQfik

That was great. I really want to find the full thing now. Tyson recently became my new favourite scientist.

Turtwig

Zillah wrote: »

That was great. I really want to find the full thing now. Tyson recently became my new favourite scientist.

Yeah, the way he debunks some things is class *cough* Mayan Calendar *cough*

I also prefer the way he respects people alot more:)

Sam Vimes

Dades wrote: »

I guess he's trying to stop stupid people 'educating' those who have never, for whatever reason, thought about the whole thing.

I've talked to a few otherwise sensible people who were under the impression that there's some kind of controversy over evolution. They used the "it's a theory" line