Bests & Worsts Reviews from Amazon

This review is based on the original 1989 edition. I have not seen the later revised edition. The "science" in this book is extremely bad. For a school board member to recommend this book as a supplementary science text is evidence of incompetence. One long example of this, which I am glad to see has been covered by other reviewers, is the account of taxonomy based on genetic sequence data. Their account of the standard evolutionary interpretation is wrong, wrong, wrong! Having also read Michael Denton's "Evolution: A Theory in Crisis", I know where they got this seriously incorrect understanding of evolutionary genetics. A correct understanding of evolutionary genetics would reveal that the sequence-based taxonomy is in remarkably good agreement with the fossil-based taxonomy. In the acknowledgments, it is stated that "First came a round [of review] by scientists engaged in teaching and research, then a round by high school teachers, then a second round by scientists." Apparently by "scientists" they mean "Creation scientists", because it is clear that no one competent in molecular biology ever approved the content of this book. Another error: "For instance, in skeletal structure, the North American wolf and the now-extincet Tasmanian wolf are nearly indistinguishable. If found as fossils, they would surely be counted as members of the same species." I am not a qualified paleontologist, so I asked one. They told me (as I expected), that this is just plain wrong. Find a qualified paleontologist and try this experiment yourself. A shortcoming: the section on the origin of life gives short shrift to the RNA World Theory, which has held up remarkably well and which is backed up by evidence such as the discovery of catalytic RNA and the discovery that the core catalytic component of the ribosome consists of RNA. Outdated: 'Arguments from ignorance' are used (science has yet to explain X, therefore the 'intelligent designer' must have done it), and some of these point out gaps in the fossil record (e.g. whale ancestor fossils) which have now been filled. Science marches on. In addition to the factual errors, omissions and archaisms, logical errors are prominent, chiefly the 'argument from design'. Boiling it all down, when the bad science and bad logic are excised, not much remains except for the cute picture of a panda on the cover. Really, it is cute. I regret that the Amazon rating system does not allow the awarding of zero stars. One picture of a panda is not worth a whole star.