What do you think?
Rate this book
A Brief History of Creation: Science and the Search for the Origin of Life
How did life begin?
It is perhaps the most important question science has ever asked. Over the centuries, the search for an answer has been entwined with some of science’s most revolutionary advances including van Leeuwenhoek’s microscope, Darwin’s theory of evolution, and Crick and Watson’s unveiling of DNA. Now, in an age of genetic engineering and space exploration, some scientists believe they are on the verge of creating life from nonliving elements and that our knowledge of the potential for life on other planets is ever-expanding. In the midst of these exciting developments, A Brief History of Creation provides an essential and illuminating history of Western science, tracing the trials and triumphs of the iconoclastic scientists who have sought to uncover the mystery of how life first came to be.
Authors Bill Mesler and H. James Cleaves II examine historical discoveries in the context of philosophical debates, political change, and our evolving understanding of the complexity of biology. The story they tell is rooted in metaphysical arguments, in a changing understanding of the age of the Earth, and even in the politics of the Cold War. It has involved exploration into the inner recesses of our cells and scientific journeys to the farthest reaches of outer space. This elegantly written narrative culminates in an analysis of modern models for life’s genesis, such as the possibility that some of the earliest life was composed of little more than RNA, and that life arose around deep-sea hydrothermal vents or even on other planets, only to be carried to the Earth on meteorites.
Can we ever conclusively prove how life began? A Brief History of Creation is a fascinating exploration not only of the origin-of-life question but of the very nature of scientific objectivity and the process of scientific discovery.
It is perhaps the most important question science has ever asked. Over the centuries, the search for an answer has been entwined with some of science’s most revolutionary advances including van Leeuwenhoek’s microscope, Darwin’s theory of evolution, and Crick and Watson’s unveiling of DNA. Now, in an age of genetic engineering and space exploration, some scientists believe they are on the verge of creating life from nonliving elements and that our knowledge of the potential for life on other planets is ever-expanding. In the midst of these exciting developments, A Brief History of Creation provides an essential and illuminating history of Western science, tracing the trials and triumphs of the iconoclastic scientists who have sought to uncover the mystery of how life first came to be.
Authors Bill Mesler and H. James Cleaves II examine historical discoveries in the context of philosophical debates, political change, and our evolving understanding of the complexity of biology. The story they tell is rooted in metaphysical arguments, in a changing understanding of the age of the Earth, and even in the politics of the Cold War. It has involved exploration into the inner recesses of our cells and scientific journeys to the farthest reaches of outer space. This elegantly written narrative culminates in an analysis of modern models for life’s genesis, such as the possibility that some of the earliest life was composed of little more than RNA, and that life arose around deep-sea hydrothermal vents or even on other planets, only to be carried to the Earth on meteorites.
Can we ever conclusively prove how life began? A Brief History of Creation is a fascinating exploration not only of the origin-of-life question but of the very nature of scientific objectivity and the process of scientific discovery.
336 pages, Hardcover
First published December 1, 2015
85 people are currently reading
764 people want to read
About the author
Bill Mesler
3 books8 followersBill Mesler is the coauthor of Useful Delusions and A Brief History of Creation. He lives in Washington, DC.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 62 reviews
May 21, 2023
How did life on Earth begin? This has been a burning question in people's minds for millennia. In this book, Bill Mesler and H. James Cleaves II provide a history of how early scholars....then natural philosophers (early scientists)....then modern scientists have addressed this question over the course of history.
The book includes brief biographies of some pertinent scholars as well as their ideas about how life arose. I'm not going to provide a summary of these big thinkers - there were too many of them.
I'll just say that, for a very long time, intellectuals from all cultures accepted the notion of spontaneous generation: the belief that living things can spring from inorganic substances. For example, ancient settlements along the Nile River were regularly flooded, after which thousands of frogs appeared in the rich soil. People just thought the frogs formed from the dirt.
Historically, humans simply accepted that some living things hatch from eggs (like birds), some are born from mothers (like pigs), and some are created from soil, old food, dirty clothes.....whatever. Natural philosophers did myriad experiments that 'proved' spontaneous generation occurred, but we now know their experiments were seriously flawed.
Whatever their beliefs, natural philosophers had to be careful to attribute life on Earth to the work of God. Any other suggestion resulted in punishment from the Church, or even death. One early researcher who published his work on spontaneous generation (apparently without invoking God) had his feet and legs crushed, after which he was paraded through town and hanged. This kind of thing probably stifled a lot of research. (LOL....but wryly.) Nevertheless scientists carried on, being infinitely curious about how life came to be.
In time Darwin proposed his theory of evolution.
This 'eureka development' led scientists to believe that a 'first living organism' (FLO) gave rise to millions of species (over eons). Darwin, who was religious, never really addressed what this FLO was, or where it came from. Other researchers, though, developed many theories about the FLO and some have attempted to recreate it in the laboratory.
One current idea about the FLO is that it originated as a 'ribozyme' - an RNA enzyme that catalyzes biochemical reactions, like protein synthesis. If ribozymes were enveloped in a 'bubble' (cell membrane)......voila, the first cell. Sounds good to me....ha ha ha.
Just for fun, I'll include a recipe for spontaneously generating mice (adapted from the 17th century Flemish chemist Jean Baptiste van Helmont).
'Put a soiled shirt and your gym socks in a bowl with grains of wheat....and put it out in your garage. After about 21 days, the dirt from the clothes will react with fumes from the wheat - and the wheat will be transformed into mice.' Ha ha ha.
The book is thorough in its coverage of an interesting subject - the evolution of ideas about life's origin. For me, though, the prose is too dry and matter of fact; it could have used more humor. Also, the anecdotes feel repetitious because many natural philosophers had similar ideas and did similar experiments. Still, I'd recommend the book to readers interested in the subject.
You can follow my reviews at http://reviewsbybarbsaffer.blogspot.com/
April 3, 2016
I am conflicted about this book. I was ready to give it 4 or 5 stars all the way until the last chapter. I was positive the authors would do a better job of explaining how life might have arisen at the hydrothermal vents.
Let me start with what was good about this book and then move onto some things I felt should have been addressed before publishing:
This book provides a history of science that is entirely focused on origin of life research. Since that is in the top two of my favorite things to read about, I was extremely excited about this book and remained so for the majority of the chapters. Focusing on origin of life studies allowed me to see various scientists in a different light. Their origin of life studies are usually a side story instead of the main event. But, in this book, the authors begin at ancient times and move forward, highlighting each person who became obsessed with explaining the origins of life. It was an extremely satisfying history. The authors were really on hard of Voltaire. His book Candide is my number one favorite book of all time. It was almost crushing to me to see Voltaire portrayed in such a poor light. However, I really understood where the authors were coming from and I delighted in learning new information about all the feuds that took place as various scientists battled it out to see whose hypothesis would be the one to explain where all life originated.
What I did not like about this book was that the authors sandwiched our best possible theory about the origin of life, the vent hypothesis, in between history (including primordial soup) and the RNA World.
They failed to explain why the RNA World and other hypotheses fail. There was not one mention of thermodynamics at the vents and very little focus on the natural acidic conditions which are capable of sending hydrogen through the rocky membrane to assemble amino acids, fatty acids, and DNA. There was no discussion of evolving channels capable of pumping Na+ so the cells could break free from the vents and populate the oceans. If you are looking for a proper explanation of Nick Lane, Mike Russle, and Bill Martin's work, this book is the wrong book for you. The authors don't seem to understand the hypothesis very well. In addition, when covering the RNA world, they never discussed how the theory needs to account for the energy needed to replicate. They tried to *sort of* mention it, but wow, they really messed up there. If a theory doesn't jive with the second law of thermodynamics, and if you cannot account for where the replication energy came from, then the theory is bad. Period. The authors only suggested the RNA World might explain origins of life. I am not suggesting they were sold on the idea. What I am suggesting is that they did not do nearly enough homework on the more current theories to have written a book about them.
The history gets 5 stars
The explanation of the current theories gets a 2
I cannot help but wonder how many stars Nick Lane would give this book.
For a better primer on the hydrothermal vent and RNA World hypotheses, you should read Adam Rutherford's Creation. It was exceptional and really makes Nick Lane's work easy to understand.
Let me start with what was good about this book and then move onto some things I felt should have been addressed before publishing:
This book provides a history of science that is entirely focused on origin of life research. Since that is in the top two of my favorite things to read about, I was extremely excited about this book and remained so for the majority of the chapters. Focusing on origin of life studies allowed me to see various scientists in a different light. Their origin of life studies are usually a side story instead of the main event. But, in this book, the authors begin at ancient times and move forward, highlighting each person who became obsessed with explaining the origins of life. It was an extremely satisfying history. The authors were really on hard of Voltaire. His book Candide is my number one favorite book of all time. It was almost crushing to me to see Voltaire portrayed in such a poor light. However, I really understood where the authors were coming from and I delighted in learning new information about all the feuds that took place as various scientists battled it out to see whose hypothesis would be the one to explain where all life originated.
What I did not like about this book was that the authors sandwiched our best possible theory about the origin of life, the vent hypothesis, in between history (including primordial soup) and the RNA World.
They failed to explain why the RNA World and other hypotheses fail. There was not one mention of thermodynamics at the vents and very little focus on the natural acidic conditions which are capable of sending hydrogen through the rocky membrane to assemble amino acids, fatty acids, and DNA. There was no discussion of evolving channels capable of pumping Na+ so the cells could break free from the vents and populate the oceans. If you are looking for a proper explanation of Nick Lane, Mike Russle, and Bill Martin's work, this book is the wrong book for you. The authors don't seem to understand the hypothesis very well. In addition, when covering the RNA world, they never discussed how the theory needs to account for the energy needed to replicate. They tried to *sort of* mention it, but wow, they really messed up there. If a theory doesn't jive with the second law of thermodynamics, and if you cannot account for where the replication energy came from, then the theory is bad. Period. The authors only suggested the RNA World might explain origins of life. I am not suggesting they were sold on the idea. What I am suggesting is that they did not do nearly enough homework on the more current theories to have written a book about them.
The history gets 5 stars
The explanation of the current theories gets a 2
I cannot help but wonder how many stars Nick Lane would give this book.
For a better primer on the hydrothermal vent and RNA World hypotheses, you should read Adam Rutherford's Creation. It was exceptional and really makes Nick Lane's work easy to understand.
March 27, 2022
4.5⭐
In the first part of this review, i will talk about historical story of the origin of life, in the second part i will talk about the scientific story, in the third part i will talk about my cynical vision about the world. if you're happy with life and existence, DON'T read the third part (seriously don't read it).
First part
The creation stories of most religions are remarkably similar in this regard. In the beginning, there is nothing, or at least something close to nothing. For the Hindus, it was an unknowable chaos, for the Chinese, a formless Dao. The Egyptians believed, understandably, that the universe began with only a mass of water, called Nu, which was surrounded by darkness.
These formless beginnings are typically followed by a divine process of creation, culminating in the appearance of human beings, often from a natural substance that makes some cultural sense.
In Egypt, the original god, Atum, spawned the rest of the gods by masturbating.
For the Norse, the first humans were forged from ice.
The Mayans believed human beings emerged from wet clay, as did the ancient Assyrians.
In the book of Genesis, “the Lord God formed man of the dust of the ground.”
All of these accounts must have seemed reasonable to their creators.
Second part
The Earth had just been 500 million years old at the time. The Sun was a fuzzy ball of light, and the turbid ocean was in its infancy. Other bright balls of light sped across the sky at regular intervals, crashing into the sea and trailing long tails of fire. These meteor triggered tsunamis that slammed onto continents, generating clouds that dimmed the Sun.
In contrast to this hellish but magnificent sight, the turbid water brewed a microscopic tale. Here, Organic molecules were produced from lightning flashes and cosmic rays, and they collided, fused, and broke apart again in a 500 million-year-old game of building blocks.
Finally, a trembling chain of organic molecules split into two strands. The strands drew in other molecules until they created two identical replicas of the original, which then split apart and copied themselves.
In this game of building blocks, the probability of producing such a self-replicating chain of organic molecules was so minuscule that it was as if a tornado had picked up a pile of metallic trash and deposited it as a fully-assembled Boeing 747.
But it happened, and so, a breathtaking history of 3.5 billion years had begun
The Archean Eon was followed by the Proterozoic Eon, each billions of years,
then the Cambrian’s 70 million years,
the Ordovician’s 60 million years,
the Silurian’s 40 million years,
the Devonian’s 50 million years,
the Carboniferous’s 65 million years,
and the Permian’s 55 million years.
then the Triassic’s 35 million years,
the Jurassic’s 58 million years,
and the Cretaceous’s 70 years,
then the Tertiary’s 64.5 million years and the Quaternary’s 2.5 million years.
Et l’homme apparut.
Son existence fut une simple péripétie à côté de ces périodes géologiques.
Dynasties and eras exploded like fireworks, et avant même que les massues faites en os lancées dans les airs par les anthropoïdes retombent, elles étaient devenues des vaisseaux spatiaux.
We do know that science will never stop searching for the answer. Perhaps that search has already yielded something important. Perhaps it has told us something about the nature of science and even of ourselves
Third part
Finely here we are in the DATA age Where you share your fake life on Facebook, Twitter, Snapchat, Instagram and a thousand others ways to spew bile across people you've never met.
updating your profile, tell the world what you had for breakfast and hope that someone, somewhere cares.
Looking up old flames, desperate to believe that you don't look as bad as they do.
Human interaction reduced to nothing more than data. Take 5 things you never knew about celebrities who've had surgery. Screaming about abortion. Rape jokes, slut-shaming, porn and an endless tide of depressing misogyny.
Sit back and smother the pain with an unknown dose of an unknown drug made in somebody's fucking kitchen. Unfulfilled promise and wishing you'd done it all differently.
Never learning from your own mistakes. watching history repeat itself , watch the slow reconciliation towards what you can get, rather than what you always hoped for....
Is it that the meaning of life, your life !!!! think about it Man, think about the way the world works. Think about the result of 4.5 billion years of Evolution
Brother of the world, Son of Chaos, Did my disgust itself create wings and water-diving powers for me? Truly, I had to fly to the extremest height to find again the fountain of delight!
END OF THE REVIEW.
In the first part of this review, i will talk about historical story of the origin of life, in the second part i will talk about the scientific story, in the third part i will talk about my cynical vision about the world. if you're happy with life and existence, DON'T read the third part (seriously don't read it).
First part
The creation stories of most religions are remarkably similar in this regard. In the beginning, there is nothing, or at least something close to nothing. For the Hindus, it was an unknowable chaos, for the Chinese, a formless Dao. The Egyptians believed, understandably, that the universe began with only a mass of water, called Nu, which was surrounded by darkness.
These formless beginnings are typically followed by a divine process of creation, culminating in the appearance of human beings, often from a natural substance that makes some cultural sense.
In Egypt, the original god, Atum, spawned the rest of the gods by masturbating.
For the Norse, the first humans were forged from ice.
The Mayans believed human beings emerged from wet clay, as did the ancient Assyrians.
In the book of Genesis, “the Lord God formed man of the dust of the ground.”
All of these accounts must have seemed reasonable to their creators.
Second part
The Earth had just been 500 million years old at the time. The Sun was a fuzzy ball of light, and the turbid ocean was in its infancy. Other bright balls of light sped across the sky at regular intervals, crashing into the sea and trailing long tails of fire. These meteor triggered tsunamis that slammed onto continents, generating clouds that dimmed the Sun.
In contrast to this hellish but magnificent sight, the turbid water brewed a microscopic tale. Here, Organic molecules were produced from lightning flashes and cosmic rays, and they collided, fused, and broke apart again in a 500 million-year-old game of building blocks.
Finally, a trembling chain of organic molecules split into two strands. The strands drew in other molecules until they created two identical replicas of the original, which then split apart and copied themselves.
In this game of building blocks, the probability of producing such a self-replicating chain of organic molecules was so minuscule that it was as if a tornado had picked up a pile of metallic trash and deposited it as a fully-assembled Boeing 747.
But it happened, and so, a breathtaking history of 3.5 billion years had begun
The Archean Eon was followed by the Proterozoic Eon, each billions of years,
then the Cambrian’s 70 million years,
the Ordovician’s 60 million years,
the Silurian’s 40 million years,
the Devonian’s 50 million years,
the Carboniferous’s 65 million years,
and the Permian’s 55 million years.
then the Triassic’s 35 million years,
the Jurassic’s 58 million years,
and the Cretaceous’s 70 years,
then the Tertiary’s 64.5 million years and the Quaternary’s 2.5 million years.
Et l’homme apparut.
Son existence fut une simple péripétie à côté de ces périodes géologiques.
Dynasties and eras exploded like fireworks, et avant même que les massues faites en os lancées dans les airs par les anthropoïdes retombent, elles étaient devenues des vaisseaux spatiaux.
We do know that science will never stop searching for the answer. Perhaps that search has already yielded something important. Perhaps it has told us something about the nature of science and even of ourselves
Third part
Finely here we are in the DATA age Where you share your fake life on Facebook, Twitter, Snapchat, Instagram and a thousand others ways to spew bile across people you've never met.
updating your profile, tell the world what you had for breakfast and hope that someone, somewhere cares.
Looking up old flames, desperate to believe that you don't look as bad as they do.
Human interaction reduced to nothing more than data. Take 5 things you never knew about celebrities who've had surgery. Screaming about abortion. Rape jokes, slut-shaming, porn and an endless tide of depressing misogyny.
Sit back and smother the pain with an unknown dose of an unknown drug made in somebody's fucking kitchen. Unfulfilled promise and wishing you'd done it all differently.
Never learning from your own mistakes. watching history repeat itself , watch the slow reconciliation towards what you can get, rather than what you always hoped for....
Is it that the meaning of life, your life !!!! think about it Man, think about the way the world works. Think about the result of 4.5 billion years of Evolution
Brother of the world, Son of Chaos, Did my disgust itself create wings and water-diving powers for me? Truly, I had to fly to the extremest height to find again the fountain of delight!
END OF THE REVIEW.
March 21, 2017
What a great read!
The book starts at the beginning (or near it, anyway) of the rise of science, its splitting from religion and its growth as a genre of study, all starting in the 1600s-ish. So fascinating to watch how one discovery would provide the fodder for the next, through the centuries to present day. All of these scientists building on the work of others, trimming off the defunct theories as they went along, not unlike what evolution itself does with genetic mutations over millennia. It's an engaging story with no end, and I was sucked right in.
Two things worth mentioning: First, of course, women are largely absent in the story of science to date, considering the ages in which science had its real birth and early growth, and even in the more modern research and discovery. Can you imagine how much farther along we may be if we included the brains of fully 50%+ of the population!? What a loss for us all.
Secondly, I was really struck by how the story of science (even to present day) mirrors that of the story of religion in all sects over time. Here we have a new way of thinking, a departure from what was first the forerunner of philosophy, and then of the church. When science first started gaining ground, researchers would be burned, hung, put to death by the courts for their blasphemy. It's an incredible thought now, isn't it? Who's to say that the rise of science won't continue to the same fate -- that one day its place will be completely taken over by another stream of thought? An interesting question!
Nowadays science is (for the majority, anyway) an accepted basis for our belief system. Even for those that are "religious," the concepts of virus, bacteria, mircrobiology, astrobiology, genetics are still accepted as truths. From what we've learned from the outer limits of space to the bottom on our Earth's core -- basically all of us now believe that these functions have linkages to the origin of life on this planet, that we can't be unrelated to the massive chasm that is this universe, from the macro to the micro. 500, 1000, 2000 years ago, that belief system would have had serious life-and-death repercussions in society. No one, in those times, could have imagined where we are now.
This book is full of really fascinating stuff. As a science writer, I have spent years now writing and editing pieces on recent science innovations and discoveries. But what I didn't have in my grey matter was the long history of how we have arrived here, nor a fulsome picture of the very active, very exciting field of the search for the origin of life. It's an ongoing race, and separate from the other fascinating one on the next track over -- the search for the meaning of life. Maybe that's the next book for this author!
The book starts at the beginning (or near it, anyway) of the rise of science, its splitting from religion and its growth as a genre of study, all starting in the 1600s-ish. So fascinating to watch how one discovery would provide the fodder for the next, through the centuries to present day. All of these scientists building on the work of others, trimming off the defunct theories as they went along, not unlike what evolution itself does with genetic mutations over millennia. It's an engaging story with no end, and I was sucked right in.
Two things worth mentioning: First, of course, women are largely absent in the story of science to date, considering the ages in which science had its real birth and early growth, and even in the more modern research and discovery. Can you imagine how much farther along we may be if we included the brains of fully 50%+ of the population!? What a loss for us all.
Secondly, I was really struck by how the story of science (even to present day) mirrors that of the story of religion in all sects over time. Here we have a new way of thinking, a departure from what was first the forerunner of philosophy, and then of the church. When science first started gaining ground, researchers would be burned, hung, put to death by the courts for their blasphemy. It's an incredible thought now, isn't it? Who's to say that the rise of science won't continue to the same fate -- that one day its place will be completely taken over by another stream of thought? An interesting question!
Nowadays science is (for the majority, anyway) an accepted basis for our belief system. Even for those that are "religious," the concepts of virus, bacteria, mircrobiology, astrobiology, genetics are still accepted as truths. From what we've learned from the outer limits of space to the bottom on our Earth's core -- basically all of us now believe that these functions have linkages to the origin of life on this planet, that we can't be unrelated to the massive chasm that is this universe, from the macro to the micro. 500, 1000, 2000 years ago, that belief system would have had serious life-and-death repercussions in society. No one, in those times, could have imagined where we are now.
This book is full of really fascinating stuff. As a science writer, I have spent years now writing and editing pieces on recent science innovations and discoveries. But what I didn't have in my grey matter was the long history of how we have arrived here, nor a fulsome picture of the very active, very exciting field of the search for the origin of life. It's an ongoing race, and separate from the other fascinating one on the next track over -- the search for the meaning of life. Maybe that's the next book for this author!
August 12, 2016
Nope, this isn't about Genesis. As quoted in the epilogue, the naturalist Alexander von Humboldt once remarked that there are three phases of scientific discovery. The first is denial. The second is denial of importance. The third is crediting the wrong person. Anyone vaguely familiar with history of scientific progress is only too familiar with the premise of the quote. Mesler and Cleaves focus on the oft-ignored origin of life discoveries and dig into the history starting from Egyptians and the Greeks to Szostak.
Many of my biochemistry friends are well aware of the names mentioned in this book but it was revelatory for me and helped me understand treacherous path of discovery. Having studied philosophical debates in history of scientific progress, I haven't had the opportunity to read about the tussles within the science community. We all know about Darwin, Watson & Crick, etc. but the details of the work of Carl Woese developed on Darwin's primodial soup was unknown to me. The battles between Voltaire and Needham couldn't have been more interesting.
I highly recommend this book to all science and history fans.
Many of my biochemistry friends are well aware of the names mentioned in this book but it was revelatory for me and helped me understand treacherous path of discovery. Having studied philosophical debates in history of scientific progress, I haven't had the opportunity to read about the tussles within the science community. We all know about Darwin, Watson & Crick, etc. but the details of the work of Carl Woese developed on Darwin's primodial soup was unknown to me. The battles between Voltaire and Needham couldn't have been more interesting.
I highly recommend this book to all science and history fans.
August 15, 2020
Before reading "A Brief History of Creation," I had hesitation to read it or not. But I'm happy that decided to read. The book at some point reminded me "A Short History of Nearly Everything," but with its own subject: a history, an evolution of scientific ideas, concepts and experiments to understand how life originated. The objective of the book was to explain how scientists came to a particular idea, and it was completely done.
May 25, 2016
It's somewhat coincidental that I read this book so soon after Nick Lane's "The Vital Question", which was written by a scientist trying to figure out how life began. This book is essentially the history of people like Nick Lane, going back to the 1700's and even before. I particularly liked the appendix of "Recipes For Life", which includes Johannes van Helmont's Recipe for Mice from the early 1600's:
"Place a dirty shirt or some rags in an open pot or barrel containing a few grains of wheat or some wheat bran, and in 21 days, mice will appear. Adult males and females will be present, and they will be capable of mating and reproducing more mice."
It is easy to make fun of now, but it actually takes a lot of effort to keep mice out of a container with wheat in it, and even more to keep maggots out of rotting meat or bacteria out of broth left out for days or weeks. It is especially difficult to do if you don't have microscopes to allow you to see just how much living stuff is teeming on every surface imaginable, so that you take the extraordinary efforts required to seal things up sufficiently well after boiling them. This is presumably why, until the 1600's, there wasn't even much debate about whether or not mice could be created by putting old rags and a sheet in a barrel; of course they could. It seemed to happen all the time.
As post-Renaissance science tried to remove the supernatural from the western worldview, the support for spontaneous generation of life declined. At the same time, an appreciation of the more-than-skin-deep similarities between different kinds of animals eventually resulted in Charles Darwin and Alfred Russell Wallace's theory of evolution by natural selection. This, however, did leave scientists, and even Science, in a bit of a quandary. If science had disproved spontaneous generation, then how could evolution by natural selection get started?
To some scientists, like Louis Pasteur, this was not a problem. He was a devout Catholic, and believed that God kickstarted things at the beginning, before allowing evolution to take things from there. For others, often motivated to a militant anti-religious viewpoint by the experience of religious wars and the treatement of people like Galileo by the Church, this gave them a reason to return again and again to the theory of how life could in fact spring from nonliving matter.
Most books about science, or even science history, are the story of how things work. They may acknowledge the problems and false starts and dead ends, but they end with science arriving at The Answer. This is not such a book. As the authors point out, there is something about the question of the origin of life which does not lend itself to an answer of "I don't know". We feel comfortable, most of us, saying this about questions like 'What is dark matter?' But, while it is the only defensible answer to the question of how life began (from the point of view of science, anyway), it is one that has tempted generation after generation to try to answer it. Some of them, perhaps many, ruined their careers and their reputations by refusing to give up their pet theories of how it had happened.
The authors take us through several hundred years of science history, and do a good job of getting a coherent narrative out of this too-large cast of characters. There are not just scientists debating biology here, there are Big Egos engaged in some pretty bitter and acrimonious arguments, with each other as well as the church, and it helps shed some light on the current debates about global warming, HIV as the cause of AIDS, etc. Science has often had to struggle with how to think rationally about matters which are both complex, and also very emotionally charged, and have done so for centuries. Someday, scientists may be able to show us how life can come from unliving starting material. Until then, it is interesting to see what science looks like when it's still in progress, and working on a question where the answers aren't known yet.
"Place a dirty shirt or some rags in an open pot or barrel containing a few grains of wheat or some wheat bran, and in 21 days, mice will appear. Adult males and females will be present, and they will be capable of mating and reproducing more mice."
It is easy to make fun of now, but it actually takes a lot of effort to keep mice out of a container with wheat in it, and even more to keep maggots out of rotting meat or bacteria out of broth left out for days or weeks. It is especially difficult to do if you don't have microscopes to allow you to see just how much living stuff is teeming on every surface imaginable, so that you take the extraordinary efforts required to seal things up sufficiently well after boiling them. This is presumably why, until the 1600's, there wasn't even much debate about whether or not mice could be created by putting old rags and a sheet in a barrel; of course they could. It seemed to happen all the time.
As post-Renaissance science tried to remove the supernatural from the western worldview, the support for spontaneous generation of life declined. At the same time, an appreciation of the more-than-skin-deep similarities between different kinds of animals eventually resulted in Charles Darwin and Alfred Russell Wallace's theory of evolution by natural selection. This, however, did leave scientists, and even Science, in a bit of a quandary. If science had disproved spontaneous generation, then how could evolution by natural selection get started?
To some scientists, like Louis Pasteur, this was not a problem. He was a devout Catholic, and believed that God kickstarted things at the beginning, before allowing evolution to take things from there. For others, often motivated to a militant anti-religious viewpoint by the experience of religious wars and the treatement of people like Galileo by the Church, this gave them a reason to return again and again to the theory of how life could in fact spring from nonliving matter.
Most books about science, or even science history, are the story of how things work. They may acknowledge the problems and false starts and dead ends, but they end with science arriving at The Answer. This is not such a book. As the authors point out, there is something about the question of the origin of life which does not lend itself to an answer of "I don't know". We feel comfortable, most of us, saying this about questions like 'What is dark matter?' But, while it is the only defensible answer to the question of how life began (from the point of view of science, anyway), it is one that has tempted generation after generation to try to answer it. Some of them, perhaps many, ruined their careers and their reputations by refusing to give up their pet theories of how it had happened.
The authors take us through several hundred years of science history, and do a good job of getting a coherent narrative out of this too-large cast of characters. There are not just scientists debating biology here, there are Big Egos engaged in some pretty bitter and acrimonious arguments, with each other as well as the church, and it helps shed some light on the current debates about global warming, HIV as the cause of AIDS, etc. Science has often had to struggle with how to think rationally about matters which are both complex, and also very emotionally charged, and have done so for centuries. Someday, scientists may be able to show us how life can come from unliving starting material. Until then, it is interesting to see what science looks like when it's still in progress, and working on a question where the answers aren't known yet.
June 12, 2021
This book combines two of my favorite subjects: science and history. Using the word "creation" is a bit misleading, and creationists will be disappointed if they are looking for a deistic explanation of origins. The subtitle is essential for understanding Mesler's objective, which is to chronicle the history of the exploration of how life began. Strictly speaking, this book traces the many searches and discoveries about the origins of life. In so doing, Mesler also provides an overview of the current understanding of this field of study; however, the most interesting part of the book for me was the collection of stories about the people involved in the quest, spanning from the ancient world up to the modern age.
Just as the evolution of life resembles the branches of a tree or large shrub, so does the search for life's beginning on earth. Some theories initially rejected by the minds of the day eventually became accepted as common knowledge and leading to multiple even more amazing discoveries. Other theories didn't pass the test of scientific inquiry over time and withered and died. Contrary to the way so many people think, this is how science works, and for the most part, it works remarkably well.
I finished this book with a much better comprehension of how life can emerge from nonliving substances. Given enough time, the right circumstances, and the necessary elements, Mesler poses the question, "Why wouldn't life eventually appear?" I freely admit that the Big Bang and the current theories about how the entire universe began still give me all kinds of problems, but life springing up from a combination of existing chemicals is something my limited faculties can almost grasp. That revelation was definitely worth the time spent reading this book.
Just as the evolution of life resembles the branches of a tree or large shrub, so does the search for life's beginning on earth. Some theories initially rejected by the minds of the day eventually became accepted as common knowledge and leading to multiple even more amazing discoveries. Other theories didn't pass the test of scientific inquiry over time and withered and died. Contrary to the way so many people think, this is how science works, and for the most part, it works remarkably well.
I finished this book with a much better comprehension of how life can emerge from nonliving substances. Given enough time, the right circumstances, and the necessary elements, Mesler poses the question, "Why wouldn't life eventually appear?" I freely admit that the Big Bang and the current theories about how the entire universe began still give me all kinds of problems, but life springing up from a combination of existing chemicals is something my limited faculties can almost grasp. That revelation was definitely worth the time spent reading this book.
July 29, 2016
Did not finish; semi-religious stuff (iirc). Not for me!
Good review: “Shallow and ininteresting” per
http://www.amazon.com/gp/customer-rev...
Note that the Nick Lane books he recommends are Good Stuff but tough going.
Good review: “Shallow and ininteresting” per
http://www.amazon.com/gp/customer-rev...
Note that the Nick Lane books he recommends are Good Stuff but tough going.
October 31, 2015
A review coming your way soon!
July 3, 2024
This would be another good (not great) science history book Except it's filled with the opinion of an atheist communist Darwinist evolution proponent who Assumes that genetics is the end to biology and will (eventually) explain the origin of life. Butt these people do not know there's too much that they leave unexplained. I've heard from a synthetic chemist I trust that we won't find that chemistry Evolves into life. So there's Still a lot to explain and this book ends (as all origin of life books end) Not answering any questions and telling a lot of stories about how science has been wrong A Lot through history. But that's a good thing. It's when science thinks it's settled that we have to worry.
August 4, 2016
To start off, I did not hate this book. The two star rating is because the associated sentence perfectly encapsulates my feelings about it: It was OK.
The problem here was a conflict between my expectations and what I actually found.
I expected a science-heavy book about scientific theories on the origin of life.
I found a history-heavy book about Euro-male personages depicted in the typical path from Ancient Greek to Modern American/British science.
If you have little knowledge of science, this is a great book for getting the typical *Western* narrative about the history of the search for the origin of life. The book meanders back and forth as much as the opinions of the scientists contained within. And while it seems to be written as a tribute to works done by these past great natural philosophers (complete with chapter-heading quotes and end-notes that were more interesting than the content itself), the book fell short for me on a few points:
1. Not enough science. The last three chapters were the most interesting for me because that is where the authors finally introduced something that was at least new to the field. No, I did not expect to be blown away by Lamarckian theory, but I did expect a better review of it rather than have paragraphs and paragraphs about how this man and that man were great scientists and then experienced a fall.
2. Not enough women. Or non-Europeans for that matter. This book would be better called "A Brief History of Creation: As told from the typical aggrandizing white-male perspective that we have been taught to believe is the best and only narrative of science that matters.
3. Meandering. This book meandered so much, that I found out the origin of the word "meander" in-text.
4. General tone. All you need to understand the tone of this book is to read the preface and the epilogue. I knew I had a winner when I read this quote in the preface:
Maybe my expectations were too high for this book. In any case, it definitely left me bored at parts, but also strangely inspired. . . to write a review as pretentious and biting as I could drum up for a book that made me think that "it was [just] ok."
Final thoughts: I don't hate the book, but I will forever begrudge it the 15 days it took me to read.
The problem here was a conflict between my expectations and what I actually found.
I expected a science-heavy book about scientific theories on the origin of life.
I found a history-heavy book about Euro-male personages depicted in the typical path from Ancient Greek to Modern American/British science.
If you have little knowledge of science, this is a great book for getting the typical *Western* narrative about the history of the search for the origin of life. The book meanders back and forth as much as the opinions of the scientists contained within. And while it seems to be written as a tribute to works done by these past great natural philosophers (complete with chapter-heading quotes and end-notes that were more interesting than the content itself), the book fell short for me on a few points:
1. Not enough science. The last three chapters were the most interesting for me because that is where the authors finally introduced something that was at least new to the field. No, I did not expect to be blown away by Lamarckian theory, but I did expect a better review of it rather than have paragraphs and paragraphs about how this man and that man were great scientists and then experienced a fall.
2. Not enough women. Or non-Europeans for that matter. This book would be better called "A Brief History of Creation: As told from the typical aggrandizing white-male perspective that we have been taught to believe is the best and only narrative of science that matters.
3. Meandering. This book meandered so much, that I found out the origin of the word "meander" in-text.
4. General tone. All you need to understand the tone of this book is to read the preface and the epilogue. I knew I had a winner when I read this quote in the preface:
As much as we wish and believe science to be the pure pursuit of truth unencumbered by human prejudice, it exists and has always existed in a world of human beings, with all of their failings and self-deceptions
Maybe my expectations were too high for this book. In any case, it definitely left me bored at parts, but also strangely inspired. . . to write a review as pretentious and biting as I could drum up for a book that made me think that "it was [just] ok."
Final thoughts: I don't hate the book, but I will forever begrudge it the 15 days it took me to read.
October 1, 2021
There are three big questions out there --
* Where did the Universe come from?
* How life started?
* How Consciousness work?
This book explores the history of the second question. Some people call this the missing first chapter in Darwin's Origin of Species. Darwin described the process that can build the entire world of living things out of a few very simple living cells, but he didn't have much to say about how the earliest living things came into being. Since then this question plagued many thinkers and scientists, and in spite of great progress, we have not been able to resolve the question.
The book describes the fascinating details of the progresses we have made so far. Like most questions in science, the path was checkered with mistakes, wrong directions, and some big leaps.
It is still an open question. In fact we don't even know whether we can ever find a definite answer about what exactly happened billions of years ago on our planet. Scientists are fairly certain they will be able to show how it could have happened, but we may never know if that is the only way it could have happened. A laboratory experiment may never be able to reproduce what may have taken a billion year to unfold on early earth.
However, one thing for sure, life came about as a natural physical process, and not through any kind of supernatural act.
* Where did the Universe come from?
* How life started?
* How Consciousness work?
This book explores the history of the second question. Some people call this the missing first chapter in Darwin's Origin of Species. Darwin described the process that can build the entire world of living things out of a few very simple living cells, but he didn't have much to say about how the earliest living things came into being. Since then this question plagued many thinkers and scientists, and in spite of great progress, we have not been able to resolve the question.
The book describes the fascinating details of the progresses we have made so far. Like most questions in science, the path was checkered with mistakes, wrong directions, and some big leaps.
It is still an open question. In fact we don't even know whether we can ever find a definite answer about what exactly happened billions of years ago on our planet. Scientists are fairly certain they will be able to show how it could have happened, but we may never know if that is the only way it could have happened. A laboratory experiment may never be able to reproduce what may have taken a billion year to unfold on early earth.
However, one thing for sure, life came about as a natural physical process, and not through any kind of supernatural act.
February 12, 2023
An excellent foray into the history of the science of the discovery of early life forms. While excursions into Darwin and DNA were expected, it was nice to see the ideas synthesized here in a concise and readable format. The rhetoric and writing were extremely engaging.
Of particular importance was the "spontaneous life" theory that seemed to be in vogue at multiple points in history.
Also playing a key role was religion, of course... and how so many of the ideas ran afoul of conventional religious wisdom. A number of these early thinkers risked their safety and livelihoods challenging the powers of key religious authorities.
The relation between the question of life origin and exobiology is presented well here as well.
Of particular importance was the "spontaneous life" theory that seemed to be in vogue at multiple points in history.
Also playing a key role was religion, of course... and how so many of the ideas ran afoul of conventional religious wisdom. A number of these early thinkers risked their safety and livelihoods challenging the powers of key religious authorities.
The relation between the question of life origin and exobiology is presented well here as well.
January 19, 2018
The title made me a little over-paranoid about whether this might secretly be a Creationist book, since I didn't recognize the authors, but it turned out to be a really good history of understandings of the nature of life, from the Renaissance through modern molecular biology. Less focus on modern science than I was expecting, but the history was detailed and a lot of it was new to me.
December 6, 2017
So interesting and well written.
February 25, 2017
Un libro di storia della scienza che si legge come un thriller
Il libro ripercorre la storia della ricerca dell’origine della vita, dai primordi del pensiero filosofico e poi scientifico sino ai giorni nostri (l’edizione è del 2016). La costruzione è quella di un thriller, per cui solo alla fine della recensione svelo il finale, con tanto di avviso di spoiler :-) .
Come ampiamente noto, la scienza progredisce attraverso ipotesi, osservazioni (includo in tale termine i calcoli) e sperimentazioni. Percorrendo la storia della ricerca dell’origine della vita, il libro illustra come le ipotesi migliorino perlopiù grazie alla disponibilità di nuovi mezzi di osservazione (ossia anche di nuovi strumenti di calcolo) e di nuove tecniche di sperimentazione: se non riesci ad osservare gli organismi microscopici, puoi solo ipotizzare che la malaria sia dovuta all’aria malsana; se non riesci a isolare efficacemente il campione, puoi imputare alle sue proprietà fenomeni che dipendono da contaminazioni esterne; se non conosci i fenomeni radioattivi, puoi solo azzardare l’età della terra inferendola dai dati a tua disposizione. Ma scienza e tecnologia non sempre vanno di pari passo, il che fa sì che ipotesi ispirate e logicamente convincenti, se contraddicono tesi consolidate, vengono spesso perse per strada, e solo a volte recuperate quando la tecnologia ne permette la verifica.
Nel seguire i percorsi della scienza relativamente alla ricerca dell’origine della vita, il libro prende in esame lo sviluppo della tecnologia e dell’ambiente sociale che accompagnano e in una certa misura incanalano le scoperte. Scelta indubbiamente felice, ma che conduce a percorsi sinuosi (non sempre obbligatori), che nuocciono pesantemente alla fluidità e linearità del discorso. In particolare, invece di premettere ad ogni capitolo (ciascuno corrispondente a una singola tappa nel percorso della ricerca dell’origine della vita) un’introduzione sull’ambiente storico e scientifico, questo viene analizzato in lunghi incisi, creando troppi “a parte” e una narrazione troppo involuta, con frequenti digressioni, rinvii e “flashback”. Ciò è coerente con la costruzione “tipo thriller moderno”, meno per un libro di storia della scienza. Per quanto interessanti, i cenni biografici potrebbero (e forse dovrebbero) essere riportati nelle note, invece di appesantire ulteriormente il capitolo.
Insomma, nel complesso un bel thriller, ma un libro di storia della scienza solo decente.
SPOILER
Ovviamente nessuna novità eclatante: se fossero stati identificati FLO (First Living Organism) e/o LUCA (Last Universal Common Ancestor) lo saprebbero già anche il lettore più disattento e il più recluso eremita. Dove si è, quindi?
Abiogenesi: la dialettica tra generazione spontanea e atto creativo è ancora viva, ma oggi persino Pascal invertirebbe i termini della sua ignobile scommessa. Da sessant’anni si sa che gli amminoacidi possono generarsi spontaneamente in un ambiente primordiale. Il passaggio da questi a proto-proteine è stato dimostrato anch’esso, anche se in scenari scarsamente verosimili. Per quanto non vi siano ancora teorie universalmente accettate sull’abiogenesi, questa ormai è un’eventualità infinitamente più probabile del disegno intelligente. Come sempre, l’agnosticismo ha poco senso e pochissima dignità.
Costruzione della vita: la Scienza è in grado ormai di creare artificialmente esseri viventi in laboratorio. Questo però non significa replicare l’origine della vita: al contrario, dimostra che un atto creativo sarebbe stato possibile (senza doverne postulare l’esistenza del sovrannaturale), ma solo con scenari da fantascienza (ben diversi dalla panspermia). Insomma, è un progresso che non influisce per nulla nella ricerca dell’origine della vita.
Metabolismo vs Replicazione, ovvero l’uovo e la gallina: qui gli scenari sono realmente innovativi; dalla dialettica sulla precedenza delle proteine o dell’acido nucleico si è passati ormai all’ipotesi dell’RNA quale molecola progenitrice. Data la definizione di vita quale organismo che possiede capacità sia metabolica (responsabilità delle proteine) sia riproduttiva (responsabilità degli acidi nucleici), ipotizzare FLO come proteina porta a chiedersi a cosa serva trasformare il cibo in energia se non ci si può riprodurre; parimenti ipotizzare FLO come acido nucleico porta a chiedersi a cosa serva potersi duplicare se non si può metabolizzare il cibo. Pretendere che FLO fosse sia proteina sia acido nucleico, del resto, è pretendere troppo da un processo casuale. Viceversa, la scoperta dei ribozimI (molecola di RNA in grado di catalizzare una reazione chimica similmente agli enzimi, che invece sono proteine) apre scenari di grande interesse e potenzialità: quasi si fosse trovata una molecola che è sufficientemente uovo e sufficientemente gallina da dare origine a entrambi.
Ambiente di origine: ormai si ha un’idea sufficientemente chiara delle condizioni in cui la vita può avere avuto origine. Anche qui, nessuno scenario definitivo, ma ipotesi sempre più realistiche e dimostrabili. Aver trovato (nel 2000) la “città perduta” in fondo all’oceano, caratterizzata dalla presenza di camini idrotermali “bianchi”, ben diversi dalle “fumarole nere” sino ad allora conosciute (per un approfondimento V. https://archive.org/stream/lescienze-... ) è stato un inatteso sostegno alle teorie sino ad allora “visionarie” di Michael Russell, e costituisce uno scenario plausibile per l’origine della vita.
Il libro ripercorre la storia della ricerca dell’origine della vita, dai primordi del pensiero filosofico e poi scientifico sino ai giorni nostri (l’edizione è del 2016). La costruzione è quella di un thriller, per cui solo alla fine della recensione svelo il finale, con tanto di avviso di spoiler :-) .
Come ampiamente noto, la scienza progredisce attraverso ipotesi, osservazioni (includo in tale termine i calcoli) e sperimentazioni. Percorrendo la storia della ricerca dell’origine della vita, il libro illustra come le ipotesi migliorino perlopiù grazie alla disponibilità di nuovi mezzi di osservazione (ossia anche di nuovi strumenti di calcolo) e di nuove tecniche di sperimentazione: se non riesci ad osservare gli organismi microscopici, puoi solo ipotizzare che la malaria sia dovuta all’aria malsana; se non riesci a isolare efficacemente il campione, puoi imputare alle sue proprietà fenomeni che dipendono da contaminazioni esterne; se non conosci i fenomeni radioattivi, puoi solo azzardare l’età della terra inferendola dai dati a tua disposizione. Ma scienza e tecnologia non sempre vanno di pari passo, il che fa sì che ipotesi ispirate e logicamente convincenti, se contraddicono tesi consolidate, vengono spesso perse per strada, e solo a volte recuperate quando la tecnologia ne permette la verifica.
Nel seguire i percorsi della scienza relativamente alla ricerca dell’origine della vita, il libro prende in esame lo sviluppo della tecnologia e dell’ambiente sociale che accompagnano e in una certa misura incanalano le scoperte. Scelta indubbiamente felice, ma che conduce a percorsi sinuosi (non sempre obbligatori), che nuocciono pesantemente alla fluidità e linearità del discorso. In particolare, invece di premettere ad ogni capitolo (ciascuno corrispondente a una singola tappa nel percorso della ricerca dell’origine della vita) un’introduzione sull’ambiente storico e scientifico, questo viene analizzato in lunghi incisi, creando troppi “a parte” e una narrazione troppo involuta, con frequenti digressioni, rinvii e “flashback”. Ciò è coerente con la costruzione “tipo thriller moderno”, meno per un libro di storia della scienza. Per quanto interessanti, i cenni biografici potrebbero (e forse dovrebbero) essere riportati nelle note, invece di appesantire ulteriormente il capitolo.
Insomma, nel complesso un bel thriller, ma un libro di storia della scienza solo decente.
SPOILER
Ovviamente nessuna novità eclatante: se fossero stati identificati FLO (First Living Organism) e/o LUCA (Last Universal Common Ancestor) lo saprebbero già anche il lettore più disattento e il più recluso eremita. Dove si è, quindi?
Abiogenesi: la dialettica tra generazione spontanea e atto creativo è ancora viva, ma oggi persino Pascal invertirebbe i termini della sua ignobile scommessa. Da sessant’anni si sa che gli amminoacidi possono generarsi spontaneamente in un ambiente primordiale. Il passaggio da questi a proto-proteine è stato dimostrato anch’esso, anche se in scenari scarsamente verosimili. Per quanto non vi siano ancora teorie universalmente accettate sull’abiogenesi, questa ormai è un’eventualità infinitamente più probabile del disegno intelligente. Come sempre, l’agnosticismo ha poco senso e pochissima dignità.
Costruzione della vita: la Scienza è in grado ormai di creare artificialmente esseri viventi in laboratorio. Questo però non significa replicare l’origine della vita: al contrario, dimostra che un atto creativo sarebbe stato possibile (senza doverne postulare l’esistenza del sovrannaturale), ma solo con scenari da fantascienza (ben diversi dalla panspermia). Insomma, è un progresso che non influisce per nulla nella ricerca dell’origine della vita.
Metabolismo vs Replicazione, ovvero l’uovo e la gallina: qui gli scenari sono realmente innovativi; dalla dialettica sulla precedenza delle proteine o dell’acido nucleico si è passati ormai all’ipotesi dell’RNA quale molecola progenitrice. Data la definizione di vita quale organismo che possiede capacità sia metabolica (responsabilità delle proteine) sia riproduttiva (responsabilità degli acidi nucleici), ipotizzare FLO come proteina porta a chiedersi a cosa serva trasformare il cibo in energia se non ci si può riprodurre; parimenti ipotizzare FLO come acido nucleico porta a chiedersi a cosa serva potersi duplicare se non si può metabolizzare il cibo. Pretendere che FLO fosse sia proteina sia acido nucleico, del resto, è pretendere troppo da un processo casuale. Viceversa, la scoperta dei ribozimI (molecola di RNA in grado di catalizzare una reazione chimica similmente agli enzimi, che invece sono proteine) apre scenari di grande interesse e potenzialità: quasi si fosse trovata una molecola che è sufficientemente uovo e sufficientemente gallina da dare origine a entrambi.
Ambiente di origine: ormai si ha un’idea sufficientemente chiara delle condizioni in cui la vita può avere avuto origine. Anche qui, nessuno scenario definitivo, ma ipotesi sempre più realistiche e dimostrabili. Aver trovato (nel 2000) la “città perduta” in fondo all’oceano, caratterizzata dalla presenza di camini idrotermali “bianchi”, ben diversi dalle “fumarole nere” sino ad allora conosciute (per un approfondimento V. https://archive.org/stream/lescienze-... ) è stato un inatteso sostegno alle teorie sino ad allora “visionarie” di Michael Russell, e costituisce uno scenario plausibile per l’origine della vita.
December 10, 2020
This book is an excellent one for the layperson like myself. It uses an historical approach to examining scientific inquiry into the origins of life on earth.
I must admit that I was most fascinated by the more recent advances in determining whether or not life can be traced to one common ancestor or not. The discussion of the role of RNA in cell development and the possible significance of deep-thermal vents to this area of inquiry were two topics which I found very intriguing.
The one drawback I faced in listening to this work on audiobook was that if I wanted more information on a scientist with a more difficult spelling than the pronunciation, I often had to work backwards. If Google search couldn't identify my rudimentary attempts at spelling, then I had to search links dealing with the discoveries made in their field of inquiry. Not only was this true for Russian names, but even an English name pronounced "woze" but spelled, in reality, "Woese."
But this is a minor quibble for such an excellent overview of the topic.. I wish that more people would try to keep up on the sciences so that we could counteract the anti-science movement in this country.
I must admit that I was most fascinated by the more recent advances in determining whether or not life can be traced to one common ancestor or not. The discussion of the role of RNA in cell development and the possible significance of deep-thermal vents to this area of inquiry were two topics which I found very intriguing.
The one drawback I faced in listening to this work on audiobook was that if I wanted more information on a scientist with a more difficult spelling than the pronunciation, I often had to work backwards. If Google search couldn't identify my rudimentary attempts at spelling, then I had to search links dealing with the discoveries made in their field of inquiry. Not only was this true for Russian names, but even an English name pronounced "woze" but spelled, in reality, "Woese."
But this is a minor quibble for such an excellent overview of the topic.. I wish that more people would try to keep up on the sciences so that we could counteract the anti-science movement in this country.
April 16, 2021
Besides the fact that I enjoyed the book based on its content, I really loved the message. The fight against dogmatism and ignorance, in different forms across the centuries, and the fact that somehow despite all the oppression of the majority, be it church, political regimes, or scientific community and academia, we were always able to come to what now seems like the truth (and maybe will change in the next decade or century). It is reassuring to see that history looks at the development of scientific thought and its findings from a very different angle than the present. This is a message that applies to so much more than the understanding of the origin of life.
September 18, 2021
This is the best book I've ever read that telling the reader about the journey to identify, describe and classify what life is. Life has been an interesting topic for like the dawn of human being. This pulls you right back to the belief of ancient Egypt about toad and flood inspired life, through the invention of microscope by Leuwenhoek, the controversy of vitalism idea, going on to Darwin theory about LUCA, Miller's astounding experiment to show life emerges from non living material, the birth of DNA, until the tangled tree (or web for more precise) our biological classification due to Margulis's symbiosis in cell evolution.
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
April 1, 2023
The title is somewhat misleading as the book is really a history of the scientific history of how life started and evolved on earth, including concepts of Darwinism, dinosaurs, Martian asteroids, origins of life on Mars and Earth simultaneously with only one surviving, to the moon landing and geologic discoveries on the moon, to the sequencing of genes and discovery of DNA, and others. It is a thorough well told history of the science and scientists, not necessarily against religion and creationism, but for those who seek to understand how nature and life in any form originates, evolves, learns and questions its surroundings. Very enjoyable reading.
February 19, 2024
***.5
This is less a book about the actual science, and much more a history of the people who were conducting that science. There are some interesting bits, but do we really need yet another brief biographical summary of famous figures like Darwin, Pasteur, Leeuwenhoek, Voltaire, Watson & Crick, et al.
The audiobook narration was especially bad, with weird intonation given to each sentence as if it was a question and standalone statement at the same time, making it difficult to follow the flow of a paragraph. A painful and not fun listening experience.
This is less a book about the actual science, and much more a history of the people who were conducting that science. There are some interesting bits, but do we really need yet another brief biographical summary of famous figures like Darwin, Pasteur, Leeuwenhoek, Voltaire, Watson & Crick, et al.
The audiobook narration was especially bad, with weird intonation given to each sentence as if it was a question and standalone statement at the same time, making it difficult to follow the flow of a paragraph. A painful and not fun listening experience.
March 24, 2018
I enjoyed this book very much. Since I am not a "scientist", I appreciate the style of writing - easy for me to understand. I must admit I still had a difficult time understanding the rRNA, but I think I got the gist. I enjoyed learning about all those scientists, who experimented and formed hypotheses. Each generation seems to add more to the debate! I will definitely look up information on Carl Woese.
March 15, 2020
I listened to the audiobook because it was more convenient, but it was wonderfully narrated.
If you’re looking for a lay refresher from college microbiology or if you want to know more about scientists who made significant contributions to the field, it’s a wonderful resource. It’s primarily told chronologically so it gives you some information about the history of the time and how scientific investigations and discoveries contributed to that period.
I highly recommend it.
If you’re looking for a lay refresher from college microbiology or if you want to know more about scientists who made significant contributions to the field, it’s a wonderful resource. It’s primarily told chronologically so it gives you some information about the history of the time and how scientific investigations and discoveries contributed to that period.
I highly recommend it.
January 15, 2021
A thought provoking read that touches on various explanations of the origin of life on Earth through the lens of scientific discovery. The authors navigate controversy well and the epilogue reads as a kind of disclosure that any explanation of an event that happened on Earth 4 billion years ago is naturally speculative in nature. An essential for the prospective student of biology or anyone curious about this history.
January 6, 2022
An insightful view into how genes really work, and what is inheritable and what is not. This provides some good information - if you are European and go back about 1000 years, you are related to anyone who was alive then (e.g. Charlemagne)
So much has been learned about genetics over the past 20 years, but science has learned that most diseases that have an inheritable component has interaction with a number of genes. So finding a smoking gun is still a work in progress.
So much has been learned about genetics over the past 20 years, but science has learned that most diseases that have an inheritable component has interaction with a number of genes. So finding a smoking gun is still a work in progress.
February 8, 2024
I wasn’t sure what to expect from this book after only seeing the title (and not the subtitle), I would even venture to say that the title is misleading and gives it a kind of religious subtext. But if I have any qualms with this book that is my only one.
This is book draws out a beautiful journey across the sciences, with quite a bit of philosophy of science sprinkled in. I thoroughly enjoyed this book and would buy a physical copy.
This is book draws out a beautiful journey across the sciences, with quite a bit of philosophy of science sprinkled in. I thoroughly enjoyed this book and would buy a physical copy.
July 18, 2024
Název knihy by klidně mohl začínat slovy: Příběh o...
Autoři zde totiž popisují velmi poutavým způsobem příběh o přístupu vědy, k otázce vzniku života, příběh o vědcích a jejich mnohdy strastiplných životních cestách a v neposlední řadě také příběh o hledání objektivní pravdy.
Dvojice autorů píše také příběh, který zatím nemá konce, ale píše ho tak dobře, že jsem s chutí "hltal" i poznámky pod čarou.
Autoři zde totiž popisují velmi poutavým způsobem příběh o přístupu vědy, k otázce vzniku života, příběh o vědcích a jejich mnohdy strastiplných životních cestách a v neposlední řadě také příběh o hledání objektivní pravdy.
Dvojice autorů píše také příběh, který zatím nemá konce, ale píše ho tak dobře, že jsem s chutí "hltal" i poznámky pod čarou.
March 23, 2018
This is a perfect book.
The author has a writing style that kept me engaged not only from start to finish but also through the chapter notes. Day by day as I read this book I found myself eager to pick up the delightful task where I had left off the day before.
This book combines science, biography, adventure, and wonder. I am a better person for having read it.
The author has a writing style that kept me engaged not only from start to finish but also through the chapter notes. Day by day as I read this book I found myself eager to pick up the delightful task where I had left off the day before.
This book combines science, biography, adventure, and wonder. I am a better person for having read it.
September 7, 2020
An amazing book regarding the history of the starting of life research. From van Leeuwenhoek who saw for the same time a bacteria with his hand made microscope until Crick and Watson who discovered the structure of the DNA. Is like an Sapiens by Noah Harari in the Species Creation and evolution domains.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 62 reviews