What do you think?
Rate this book
Close Encounters with Humankind: A Paleoanthropologist Investigates Our Evolving Species
“Deftly weaving together science and personal observation, Lee proves an engaging, authoritative guide… of the human condition.” ―Kate Wong, editor at Scientific American What can fossilized teeth tell us about our ancient ancestors’ life expectancy? Did farming play a problematic role in the history of human evolution? And what do we have in common with Neanderthals? In this captivating bestseller, Close Encounters with Humankind , paleoanthropologist Sang-Hee Lee explores our greatest evolutionary questions from new and unexpected angles. Through a series of entertaining, bite-sized chapters that combine anthropological insight with cutting-edge science, we gain fresh perspectives into our first hominin ancestors and ways to challenge perceptions about the traditional progression of evolution. With Lee as our guide, we discover that we indeed have always been a species of continuous change. 17 black and white photographs
304 pages, Paperback
First published February 20, 2018
185 people are currently reading
1667 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 140 reviews
December 18, 2023
“When we look more closely at the human journey, we see not a straight line, but a curvy, winding river. Humanity did not agonize over the best long-term course for development. We proceeded by making the best decision possible at that moment, within our specific environment.”
I don’t have any business writing a book review this week, but I don’t want to leave this book without a couple of thoughts. I read this one on and off over a period of nearly three months! Not because it was boring or hard to read; rather, I was simply a bit of a distracted slacker. Author Sang-Hee Lee is a professor of anthropology at UC Riverside and she not only knows her stuff, she shares her knowledge with enthusiasm and writes in a very engaging manner. I was happy to note that some of this information wasn’t exactly new to me (thanks to having gained some amateur knowledge through Thomas Halliday’s Otherlands and Beebe Bahrami’s Café Neandertal). I took away a whole lot of new factual tidbits as well.
Each offering here is a stand-alone essay focusing on a certain topic. This is why it made it easier for me to read a couple and then read a novel or two in between! The essay titles are fun and give you an idea of what lies ahead. Some of my favorites were “The Birth of Fatherhood”, “Big-Brained Babies Give Moms Big Grief”, “Got Milk?”, “Cooperation Connects You and Me”, “King Kong”, “Breaking Back”, “You are a Neanderthal!”, “Hobbits”, and “Seven Billion Humans, One Single Race?” Evolution is tied closely with genetics and there is some easy to understand gene stuff here which I found fascinating as well. You don’t have to be an expert to soak this in – I’m certainly not!
I’m not going to attempt to translate what I’ve learned into words in a review – the teaching is the author’s job, not mine, and I’m out of time anyway. So here are a few of the passages I highlighted and shared with my daughter as I read along. You may or may not be as intrigued by it as she was (saying to me “Please text me any parts you think I’d like”), but then again she’s a bit of a science nerd. She’s got Darwin’s Origin of the Species, a genetic testing kit, and a DNA stuffed toy on her Christmas list. Oh, and clothes – she’s a “regular kid” too!
“Lovejoy’s provisioning model… implied that the idealized “nuclear family”… was supposedly written into our DNA from the beginning of human evolution. In other words, women have, for millions of years, been getting food in exchange for sex with men. Research in the past thirty years lends support to the idea that the Lovejoy model is wrong… This ideal of a nuclear family is most likely a product of capitalism and the market economy, rather than a biological imperative. Lovejoy’s model might have been less about human origins and more about men’s fantasy of having infinite sex.”
“Humans had to make a choice between bipedalism and childbirth, and it appears we chose bipedalism; our pelvises have not really increased in size through the last 2 million years of human evolution, while our brain size has increased from 900 to 1,400 cc, on average. As a consequence, mothers have the unenviable task of forcing a big-brained baby through a narrow birth canal. The price for our upright mobility is the most difficult birth process in the animal kingdom.”
“Humans are reportedly 99.997 percent genetically similar across all groups, making us exceptionally closely related compared to other animals.”
“By the age of six or seven, a child’s brain is 80-90 percent of its adult size. After that point, fewer new brain cells are made, and the ability to retain new information becomes more difficult… After early childhood, the brain starts the new task of making connections between brain cells, instead of simply making new brain cells… given that the human brain may have as many as 100 billion brain cells, the number of possible connections between all possible pairs of brain cells is absolutely mind-blowing.”
“Anthropologists have reached a consensus that race is not a biological concept, but a historical, cultural, and social concept.”
I don’t have any business writing a book review this week, but I don’t want to leave this book without a couple of thoughts. I read this one on and off over a period of nearly three months! Not because it was boring or hard to read; rather, I was simply a bit of a distracted slacker. Author Sang-Hee Lee is a professor of anthropology at UC Riverside and she not only knows her stuff, she shares her knowledge with enthusiasm and writes in a very engaging manner. I was happy to note that some of this information wasn’t exactly new to me (thanks to having gained some amateur knowledge through Thomas Halliday’s Otherlands and Beebe Bahrami’s Café Neandertal). I took away a whole lot of new factual tidbits as well.
Each offering here is a stand-alone essay focusing on a certain topic. This is why it made it easier for me to read a couple and then read a novel or two in between! The essay titles are fun and give you an idea of what lies ahead. Some of my favorites were “The Birth of Fatherhood”, “Big-Brained Babies Give Moms Big Grief”, “Got Milk?”, “Cooperation Connects You and Me”, “King Kong”, “Breaking Back”, “You are a Neanderthal!”, “Hobbits”, and “Seven Billion Humans, One Single Race?” Evolution is tied closely with genetics and there is some easy to understand gene stuff here which I found fascinating as well. You don’t have to be an expert to soak this in – I’m certainly not!
I’m not going to attempt to translate what I’ve learned into words in a review – the teaching is the author’s job, not mine, and I’m out of time anyway. So here are a few of the passages I highlighted and shared with my daughter as I read along. You may or may not be as intrigued by it as she was (saying to me “Please text me any parts you think I’d like”), but then again she’s a bit of a science nerd. She’s got Darwin’s Origin of the Species, a genetic testing kit, and a DNA stuffed toy on her Christmas list. Oh, and clothes – she’s a “regular kid” too!
“Lovejoy’s provisioning model… implied that the idealized “nuclear family”… was supposedly written into our DNA from the beginning of human evolution. In other words, women have, for millions of years, been getting food in exchange for sex with men. Research in the past thirty years lends support to the idea that the Lovejoy model is wrong… This ideal of a nuclear family is most likely a product of capitalism and the market economy, rather than a biological imperative. Lovejoy’s model might have been less about human origins and more about men’s fantasy of having infinite sex.”
“Humans had to make a choice between bipedalism and childbirth, and it appears we chose bipedalism; our pelvises have not really increased in size through the last 2 million years of human evolution, while our brain size has increased from 900 to 1,400 cc, on average. As a consequence, mothers have the unenviable task of forcing a big-brained baby through a narrow birth canal. The price for our upright mobility is the most difficult birth process in the animal kingdom.”
“Humans are reportedly 99.997 percent genetically similar across all groups, making us exceptionally closely related compared to other animals.”
“By the age of six or seven, a child’s brain is 80-90 percent of its adult size. After that point, fewer new brain cells are made, and the ability to retain new information becomes more difficult… After early childhood, the brain starts the new task of making connections between brain cells, instead of simply making new brain cells… given that the human brain may have as many as 100 billion brain cells, the number of possible connections between all possible pairs of brain cells is absolutely mind-blowing.”
“Anthropologists have reached a consensus that race is not a biological concept, but a historical, cultural, and social concept.”
January 22, 2024
Close Encounters with Humankind by Sang-Hee Lee, should have been right down my alley. But it was not. I must have my whingey underpants when writing this, as this is my second consecutive review with an underwhelming rating.
Okay, this book covers what one would expect in a book about anthropology, written by a paleoanthropologist. There is so much to learn about regarding early human life – chapters have captivating titles such as: Are we Cannibals? Who Were the First Hominin Ancestors? Asia Challenges Africa’s Stronghold on the Birthplace of Humanity. You get the picture? It is all good stuff.
However, I expected something a little more substantial. In my mind, this is more like pop-science. I have no reason to doubt the veracity of the statements made by the author here. Who am I to do that?
This reads a bit like Bill Bryson’s A Short History of Nearly Everything, but it is not as entertaining and certainly not as funny.
Having said all of that - this would be a good addition sitting on most coffee tables.
3 Stars
Okay, this book covers what one would expect in a book about anthropology, written by a paleoanthropologist. There is so much to learn about regarding early human life – chapters have captivating titles such as: Are we Cannibals? Who Were the First Hominin Ancestors? Asia Challenges Africa’s Stronghold on the Birthplace of Humanity. You get the picture? It is all good stuff.
However, I expected something a little more substantial. In my mind, this is more like pop-science. I have no reason to doubt the veracity of the statements made by the author here. Who am I to do that?
This reads a bit like Bill Bryson’s A Short History of Nearly Everything, but it is not as entertaining and certainly not as funny.
Having said all of that - this would be a good addition sitting on most coffee tables.
3 Stars
January 10, 2024
Paleoanthropologist Sang-Hee Lee wrote a series of essays on human evolution for a Korean science magazine geared to the general public. Shin-Young Yoon, her editor, encouraged her to compile them into what became this book.
If you're interested in the topic, it's a good introduction. Lee's tone is breezy and conversational, eschewing the jargon of the profession. She explains current theories from the loss of fur to the shift toward meat eating to the first physical feature that differentiated our ancestors from apes. (I won't keep you in suspense. It wasn't an enlarged brain, which came later; it was the feet, that we walked upright on two of them.) Lee also does a pretty good job of showing how theories have developed and changed over the course of time.
The essay that was most interesting to me was Lee's thoughts on how the most modern humans (us) are still evolving.
While these essays are not arranged chronologically, I think that it is relatively easy to keep the timelines of these events straight as Lee places these in clear context. Appendix 2 of the book is a chronological summary. A note to the publisher, I recommend including a simple chart here in the next edition if there is one.
These essays are not works of great depth, but are designed to give the reader an overview. If they whet your appetite in the area of evolution, there is a list of suggested reading at the end of the book. For the most up to date information, so much is happening in the field, you may want to check out the open access journal PaleoAnthropology, a joint publication of the Paleoanthropology Society and the European Society for the Study of Human Evolution (ESHE). (paleoanthropology dot org)
Publication 2018
If you're interested in the topic, it's a good introduction. Lee's tone is breezy and conversational, eschewing the jargon of the profession. She explains current theories from the loss of fur to the shift toward meat eating to the first physical feature that differentiated our ancestors from apes. (I won't keep you in suspense. It wasn't an enlarged brain, which came later; it was the feet, that we walked upright on two of them.) Lee also does a pretty good job of showing how theories have developed and changed over the course of time.
The essay that was most interesting to me was Lee's thoughts on how the most modern humans (us) are still evolving.
While these essays are not arranged chronologically, I think that it is relatively easy to keep the timelines of these events straight as Lee places these in clear context. Appendix 2 of the book is a chronological summary. A note to the publisher, I recommend including a simple chart here in the next edition if there is one.
These essays are not works of great depth, but are designed to give the reader an overview. If they whet your appetite in the area of evolution, there is a list of suggested reading at the end of the book. For the most up to date information, so much is happening in the field, you may want to check out the open access journal PaleoAnthropology, a joint publication of the Paleoanthropology Society and the European Society for the Study of Human Evolution (ESHE). (paleoanthropology dot org)
Publication 2018
August 27, 2023
Sang-Hee Lee, Ph.D., is a professor of anthropology at the University of California Riverside. Her articles on human prehistory and primate evolution, previously published in a leading Korean science magazine, have been collected here in an accessible and comprehensible book format.
Professor Lee writes on a variety of anthropological topics: the short history of cannibalism, the birth of fatherhood, our first hominid ancestors, big brains and birth canals, omnivorous scavenging, lactose tolerance, the misconception of race, the dawn of agriculture, the mysterious disappearance of Peking Man, and the rise of reciprocal altruism—just to name a few.
As with any collection of articles or essays, some are more interesting than others. My personal favorite is Dr. Lee’s composition on the fossil history of “King Kong,” a.k.a. Gigantopithecus blacki. There is a lot here for science nerds (like me) to revel in, but the style and (obvious) enthusiasm of the author should make this an enjoyable read for anyone with even a mild interest in evolution and/or paleontology.
Professor Lee writes on a variety of anthropological topics: the short history of cannibalism, the birth of fatherhood, our first hominid ancestors, big brains and birth canals, omnivorous scavenging, lactose tolerance, the misconception of race, the dawn of agriculture, the mysterious disappearance of Peking Man, and the rise of reciprocal altruism—just to name a few.
As with any collection of articles or essays, some are more interesting than others. My personal favorite is Dr. Lee’s composition on the fossil history of “King Kong,” a.k.a. Gigantopithecus blacki. There is a lot here for science nerds (like me) to revel in, but the style and (obvious) enthusiasm of the author should make this an enjoyable read for anyone with even a mild interest in evolution and/or paleontology.
June 28, 2022
Imagínate compartir un café con una amiga que te cuenta historias inquietantes sobre el origen de nuestra especie. Relatos que dejan más preguntas de las que uno acostumbra a llevar en la cabeza acerca de cuestiones cotidianas como el porqué de la paternidad, por qué no nacemos solos, por qué la vejez es una ventaja evolutiva y hasta cómo las posturas políticas marcan posturas científicas importantes.
Desde el título ya uno sabe que “¡No seas neandertal!” es un libro de divulgación pensado para curiosos, no para expertos; tal vez por eso, cuando para la autora resulta necesario explicar cuestiones técnicas, tuve que pausar la lectura y consultar qué significaba tal o cual concepto; incluso, buscar imágenes para diferenciar especies o regiones geográficas. Pero, en general, como un buen amigo sabio, este libro resulta encantador y enriquecedor.
Desde el título ya uno sabe que “¡No seas neandertal!” es un libro de divulgación pensado para curiosos, no para expertos; tal vez por eso, cuando para la autora resulta necesario explicar cuestiones técnicas, tuve que pausar la lectura y consultar qué significaba tal o cual concepto; incluso, buscar imágenes para diferenciar especies o regiones geográficas. Pero, en general, como un buen amigo sabio, este libro resulta encantador y enriquecedor.
March 3, 2023
Όχι κακό, απλώς μη συστηματικό και αποσπασματικό, καθώς πρόκειται περισσότερο για συγκέντρωση δοκιμίων, παρά για ενιαίο έργο, ίσως είναι καλό για την εισαγωή στην εξέλιξη του είδους μας... ίσως όχι, ακριβώς λόγω της αποσπασματικότητας. Μάλλον λειτουργεί σαν πατ-πατ στην πλάτη για ανθρώπους που έχουν διαβάσει περισσότερα σχετικά και περισσότερο εμβριθείς αναλύσεις επί του θέματος, ή σαν καλοπροαίρετο "δόλωμα" στην περίπτωση του αδαούς, ώστε να ανοίξει τους ορίζοντές του με περισσότερα βιβλία (άλλωστε παρέχεται και σχετική λίστα στο τέλος).
Σε γενικές γραμμές μια ευχάριστη αναγνωστική πρόταση για το καλοκαίρι σε αντίθεση με τα κλασικά αστυνομικά τύπου "ΑΛΚΟΟΛΙΚΟΣ ΜΠΑΤΣΟΣ ΒΡΗΚΕ ΟΤΙ Ο ΜΠΑΤΛΕΡ ΤΟΝ ΣΚΟΤΩΣΕ ΚΙ ΑΣ ΜΗΝ ΥΠΑΡΧΕΙ ΜΠΑΤΛΕΡ ΚΑΙ ΜΕΤΑ ΕΣΠΑΣΕ ΟΛΟ ΤΟ ΜΠΑΡ" (ναι, Γιου Νέσμπε, για σένα λέω) που διαβάζει ο μέσος αποχαυνωμένος από τον ήλιο Έλληνας στις παραλίες. Για άλλες κουλτούρες πλην της ελληνικής δε νομιμοποιούμαι να μιλήσω.
Υ.Γ. Αν είναι "ένα από τα 10 καλύτερα επιστημονικά έργα του 2018", κάτι δεν πήγε καλά με την παραγωγή επιστημονικών έργων τη συγκεκριμένη χρονιά...
Σε γενικές γραμμές μια ευχάριστη αναγνωστική πρόταση για το καλοκαίρι σε αντίθεση με τα κλασικά αστυνομικά τύπου "ΑΛΚΟΟΛΙΚΟΣ ΜΠΑΤΣΟΣ ΒΡΗΚΕ ΟΤΙ Ο ΜΠΑΤΛΕΡ ΤΟΝ ΣΚΟΤΩΣΕ ΚΙ ΑΣ ΜΗΝ ΥΠΑΡΧΕΙ ΜΠΑΤΛΕΡ ΚΑΙ ΜΕΤΑ ΕΣΠΑΣΕ ΟΛΟ ΤΟ ΜΠΑΡ" (ναι, Γιου Νέσμπε, για σένα λέω) που διαβάζει ο μέσος αποχαυνωμένος από τον ήλιο Έλληνας στις παραλίες. Για άλλες κουλτούρες πλην της ελληνικής δε νομιμοποιούμαι να μιλήσω.
Υ.Γ. Αν είναι "ένα από τα 10 καλύτερα επιστημονικά έργα του 2018", κάτι δεν πήγε καλά με την παραγωγή επιστημονικών έργων τη συγκεκριμένη χρονιά...
December 20, 2017
Received to review via Netgalley; publication date 20th February 2018
Close Encounters with Humankind is a sort of compendium of various questions about hominid ancestors. It doesn’t try to tackle things chronologically or systematically. Instead, it poses interesting questions — are there cannibals in the line of human descent? How much of a Neanderthal am I? — and then tries to answer them with the best of what we know at the moment. Sometimes the answers aren’t entirely satisfactory or complete, because the evidence isn’t there (yet, or perhaps ever; behaviour, after all, does not fossilise).
It’s a pretty good tour through some interesting topics, although if you’re already interested in this sort of thing, you may well find that there’s nothing much new here for you. But if that knowledge is a bit cursory or out of date, this’d probably be perfect.
Reviewed for The Bibliophibian.
Close Encounters with Humankind is a sort of compendium of various questions about hominid ancestors. It doesn’t try to tackle things chronologically or systematically. Instead, it poses interesting questions — are there cannibals in the line of human descent? How much of a Neanderthal am I? — and then tries to answer them with the best of what we know at the moment. Sometimes the answers aren’t entirely satisfactory or complete, because the evidence isn’t there (yet, or perhaps ever; behaviour, after all, does not fossilise).
It’s a pretty good tour through some interesting topics, although if you’re already interested in this sort of thing, you may well find that there’s nothing much new here for you. But if that knowledge is a bit cursory or out of date, this’d probably be perfect.
Reviewed for The Bibliophibian.
June 23, 2018
This was a decent intro to paleoanthropology, but it was too basic to be of much interest to me. Looking at my notes, I didn't really learn anything of note. Which is why I quit reading. 2.4 stars, for me.
You might like it better if you are new to the subject. She writes well, and certainly knows the topic. And she has an interesting background: a young Korean American scientist who looks at the topic from a fresh viewpoint. Hmm. Maybe I should get it out again?
You might like it better if you are new to the subject. She writes well, and certainly knows the topic. And she has an interesting background: a young Korean American scientist who looks at the topic from a fresh viewpoint. Hmm. Maybe I should get it out again?
December 18, 2018
This is a collection of Dr. Lee's columns written for a Korean general science publication. As such, they're very short and not very informative. If you're looking for in-depth looks at particular topics in evolution and paleoanthropology, this is not your book. There's a Further Reading section that offers some suggestions, but I wish it were more extensive.
All that said, the articles are well written and engaging and raise questions about hominin evolution that may lead a motivated reader to investigate further. I was particularly interested in the columns about the ever-changing view on where modern humans came from and the rapidly advancing science of DNA research. (For example, the physical evidence of the Denisovans is a handful of bone fragments. We only know they were a population distinct from humans or Neanderthal based on their DNA.)
All that said, the articles are well written and engaging and raise questions about hominin evolution that may lead a motivated reader to investigate further. I was particularly interested in the columns about the ever-changing view on where modern humans came from and the rapidly advancing science of DNA research. (For example, the physical evidence of the Denisovans is a handful of bone fragments. We only know they were a population distinct from humans or Neanderthal based on their DNA.)
September 4, 2019
Excellent Discussions, Lives up to Title.........
I zoomed through this book quickly because Sang-Hee Lee discusses many of the very questions I have about humankind and evolution. She is obviously steeped in knowledge and research but also has an engaging style. I find it hard to believe she originally wrote this in Korean because the English writing is so good.
Best of all is that Lee doesn’t pretend to know anything that isn’t proven nor does she insist on only one explanation. She outlines all the possibilities and gives the reader enough information to decide for her or himself.
Among the interesting discussions are what makes us different from other animals and our predecessors? What is race, really? Who or what is our common ancestor, the first departure from apes? Why did we become bipedal? Why are our infants so dependent on mothering when other species run out of the womb ready for anything?
And why are we just about the only mammalian species where the father plays a role in raising the child (or at least is expected to by societal norms)?
Those are just a few of the discussions intermixed with stories about the Piltdown Man hoax and the controversial discoveries of hobbit and King Kong fossils.
Great book, strongly recommended for those like me who are fascinated on the subject.
I zoomed through this book quickly because Sang-Hee Lee discusses many of the very questions I have about humankind and evolution. She is obviously steeped in knowledge and research but also has an engaging style. I find it hard to believe she originally wrote this in Korean because the English writing is so good.
Best of all is that Lee doesn’t pretend to know anything that isn’t proven nor does she insist on only one explanation. She outlines all the possibilities and gives the reader enough information to decide for her or himself.
Among the interesting discussions are what makes us different from other animals and our predecessors? What is race, really? Who or what is our common ancestor, the first departure from apes? Why did we become bipedal? Why are our infants so dependent on mothering when other species run out of the womb ready for anything?
And why are we just about the only mammalian species where the father plays a role in raising the child (or at least is expected to by societal norms)?
Those are just a few of the discussions intermixed with stories about the Piltdown Man hoax and the controversial discoveries of hobbit and King Kong fossils.
Great book, strongly recommended for those like me who are fascinated on the subject.
April 29, 2019
Finalmente un buen libro sobre la evolución humana, escrito por una autoridad en la materia y en un tono agradable y al alcance de todos.
Este entretenido libro presenta una visión panorámica del estado presente (¡actualizado a 2018!) del conocimiento sobre la evolución humana. Lo hace a través de 22 ensayos cortos, bien escritos, extremadamente informativos y actualizados. Adicionalmente el libro contiene cuatro capítulos finales (2 epílogos y 2 apéndices) - no dejen de leerlos - con una clarísima síntesis de la teoría de la evolución y un resumen genial de la historia de nuestra especie según los datos más recientes.
Para animarlos a hacer la inversión y leer sin demoras el libro (antes que algún descubrimiento paleoantropologico nuevo haga obsoletos algunos capítulos, esta ciencia va muy rápido) les enumero aquí los ensayos de los que se componen acompañados por una o dos frases con la idea más interesante del ensayo.
No tomen esta lista como “spoilers” o un resumen del libro, sino más bien como información que nunca encontrarán en una tabla de contenido y que los animara a adentrarse sin demora en su lectura.
1 ) Somos Canibales. No, es un mito.
2 ) El nacimiento de la paternidad. Los hombres humanos somos muy pequeños y tenemos las pelotas muy chiquitas.
3 ) ¿Quiénes fueron nuestros primeros ancestros homininos? No se sabe exactamente, pero el Homo Erectus es el mejor candidato.
4 ) Los bebés con cerebros grandes causan un gran dolor a las madres. Las mujeres la han pasado muy mal en la historia de nuestra especie.
5 ) Nos gusta la carne. No tenemos opción, el cerebro está hecho de grasa y consume mucha energía.
6 ) ¿Tienes leche? La capacidad de digerir la leche en adultos humanos (no de todos) es una muestra de que la evolución humana no se ha detenido.
7 ) Un gen para Blanca Nieves. Los primeros europeos seguramente eran morenitos.
8 ) La abuelita es una artista. El surgimiento de los abuelos coincide con el surgimiento del arte y la cultura.
9 ) ¿Aportó prosperidad la agricultura? No. Solo aumento la población y de allí nos hizo migrar.
10 ) El hombre de Pekín y la Yakuza. Los huesos del hombre de Pekín se perdieron.
11 ) Asia cuestiona el papel de Africa como lugar de origen de la humanidad. Se han encontrado homininos muy antiguos en Asia y eso no es consistente con la idea que todos migraron desde Africa.
12 ) La Cooperacion nos conecta a ti y a mi. Somos muy débiles para sobrevivir sin la cooperación.
13 ) King Kong. Había Gorilas gigantes por culpa del depredador más terrible en la historia de la vida: el hombre.
14 ) Vuelta atrás. Nuestra especie es lo que es no por el cerebro sino por el bipedismo.
15 ) En busca de la cara más humana. No todas las reconstrucciones de los cráneos antiguos han sido precisas.
16 ) Nuestro cerebro cambiante. El cerebro de los primeros humanos era un poco más grande que el de un bebé.
17 ) ¡Eres un Neandertal! Hablamos gracias al romance con Neandertales.
18 ) El reloj molecular no está en hora. No sabemos muy bien que tan antiguo es Homo sapiens.
19 ) ¿Son los denisovanos los neandertales asiáticos? Hace 30,000 años convivían 3 especies de homo incluyéndonos.
20 ) Hobbits. Los hombres de flores son muy pequeños para ser humanos y muy buenos navegantes para ser Austrolupithecus.
21 ) Siete mil millones de humanos, ¿única raza? La raza es un tema complejo, pero es seguro que no hay especies ni subespecies humanas diferentes.
22 ) ¿Siguen evolucionando los humanos? Si, aunque la evolución es lenta, el crecimiento de la población humana podría haber hecho más rápida la evolución.
¡A leerrrr!
Este entretenido libro presenta una visión panorámica del estado presente (¡actualizado a 2018!) del conocimiento sobre la evolución humana. Lo hace a través de 22 ensayos cortos, bien escritos, extremadamente informativos y actualizados. Adicionalmente el libro contiene cuatro capítulos finales (2 epílogos y 2 apéndices) - no dejen de leerlos - con una clarísima síntesis de la teoría de la evolución y un resumen genial de la historia de nuestra especie según los datos más recientes.
Para animarlos a hacer la inversión y leer sin demoras el libro (antes que algún descubrimiento paleoantropologico nuevo haga obsoletos algunos capítulos, esta ciencia va muy rápido) les enumero aquí los ensayos de los que se componen acompañados por una o dos frases con la idea más interesante del ensayo.
No tomen esta lista como “spoilers” o un resumen del libro, sino más bien como información que nunca encontrarán en una tabla de contenido y que los animara a adentrarse sin demora en su lectura.
1 ) Somos Canibales. No, es un mito.
2 ) El nacimiento de la paternidad. Los hombres humanos somos muy pequeños y tenemos las pelotas muy chiquitas.
3 ) ¿Quiénes fueron nuestros primeros ancestros homininos? No se sabe exactamente, pero el Homo Erectus es el mejor candidato.
4 ) Los bebés con cerebros grandes causan un gran dolor a las madres. Las mujeres la han pasado muy mal en la historia de nuestra especie.
5 ) Nos gusta la carne. No tenemos opción, el cerebro está hecho de grasa y consume mucha energía.
6 ) ¿Tienes leche? La capacidad de digerir la leche en adultos humanos (no de todos) es una muestra de que la evolución humana no se ha detenido.
7 ) Un gen para Blanca Nieves. Los primeros europeos seguramente eran morenitos.
8 ) La abuelita es una artista. El surgimiento de los abuelos coincide con el surgimiento del arte y la cultura.
9 ) ¿Aportó prosperidad la agricultura? No. Solo aumento la población y de allí nos hizo migrar.
10 ) El hombre de Pekín y la Yakuza. Los huesos del hombre de Pekín se perdieron.
11 ) Asia cuestiona el papel de Africa como lugar de origen de la humanidad. Se han encontrado homininos muy antiguos en Asia y eso no es consistente con la idea que todos migraron desde Africa.
12 ) La Cooperacion nos conecta a ti y a mi. Somos muy débiles para sobrevivir sin la cooperación.
13 ) King Kong. Había Gorilas gigantes por culpa del depredador más terrible en la historia de la vida: el hombre.
14 ) Vuelta atrás. Nuestra especie es lo que es no por el cerebro sino por el bipedismo.
15 ) En busca de la cara más humana. No todas las reconstrucciones de los cráneos antiguos han sido precisas.
16 ) Nuestro cerebro cambiante. El cerebro de los primeros humanos era un poco más grande que el de un bebé.
17 ) ¡Eres un Neandertal! Hablamos gracias al romance con Neandertales.
18 ) El reloj molecular no está en hora. No sabemos muy bien que tan antiguo es Homo sapiens.
19 ) ¿Son los denisovanos los neandertales asiáticos? Hace 30,000 años convivían 3 especies de homo incluyéndonos.
20 ) Hobbits. Los hombres de flores son muy pequeños para ser humanos y muy buenos navegantes para ser Austrolupithecus.
21 ) Siete mil millones de humanos, ¿única raza? La raza es un tema complejo, pero es seguro que no hay especies ni subespecies humanas diferentes.
22 ) ¿Siguen evolucionando los humanos? Si, aunque la evolución es lenta, el crecimiento de la población humana podría haber hecho más rápida la evolución.
¡A leerrrr!
March 9, 2023
Well, I’m not an atheist. I’m also not a believer in the evolution of humanity from an ancient primate species (to say nothing of animal evolution apart from humans). So, why did I read this book?
Well, I also don’t want to be ignorant of the findings of science - or shut myself into a tiny cloister away from all facts that may contradict my view. Truth is what I am interested in. So I saw this audiobook at a bargain price and snagged it up. I’m also not very well versed in paleo-anthropology - or science in general for that matter. (In fact I failed my high school bio class and managed to maneuver around it in college...) so I’d like to start dabbling in some science every now and then to make up for my general neglect of it.
This really was a fascinating listen. It is a compilation of articles written by Korean paleo-anthropologist Sang-Hee Lee that were previously published in her local science journal. The articles primarily deal with some of the most controversial findings and debates of, and within, the paleo-anthropology of human ancestry.
I’m personally still grappling with some of the information here, and where to place some of the early hominid cousins to humanity in my thinking. There are several: Neanderthal, who was intelligent and used tools but was more muscular and had an horizontally elongated skull with almost no forehead; Denisovans who were similar to Neanderthal but who we have very little in the way of fossils to know much about; (also Homo-floresiensis who were about 3 feet tall and for lack of a better description - basically resembled Tolkien’s hobbits - but may have just been an ape species;) and there are a few others as well. They are all, along with homo-sapiens, believed to have an undiscovered common ancestor that predates all discovered humanoid species.
Lee’s discussion of the scientific debate regarding where division of species occurs was also very interesting (chapter 21). There is much scientific debate as to whether these hominid fossils should be categorized as a different species from humanity, or whether these are merely extinct groups of human species. These groups did interbreed with humans after all. The DNA differences in these groups are also apparently not too dissimilar to that of different racial groups in modern humans.
It’s fairly straight forward how these fossils pose a potential problem for theists - or those who hold to a relatively literal view of the book of Genesis. The descriptions of Genesis describe a single creation of a man and a woman and from all appearances they are already human. As someone who believes humans were not evolved from animal species - but rather made directly by God, my current consideration is that God initially created the first human common ancestors - which all of these hominid species are originally from (including homo-sapiens) - and that these are all under the umbrella of what God considered to be the human species. I’m still considering some of these things.
The book also majorly focused on evolutionary explanations for all the ways humans significantly differ from animals. It was almost an evolutionary apologetic to explain these differences. Lee covered a multitude of these: from the vulnerability of human young and the duration of their need of family units, the reproduction cycle process, the difficulty of child birth, brain size, the need of simultaneous brain, skull, and facial muscle mutations to have occurred, omnivorous diet (rather than majoritively vegetarian like other primates), lack of fur, bipedalism, to the more refined differences - like: communication, art, and last - but probably most importantly - altruism. I honestly found the sheer amount of differences staggering, and was also surprised at how much evolutionary paleontologists seemed to be straining for explanations for these aspects in which we are so very different from our apparent animal forbears.
Pardon the philosophical rabbit hole here, but perhaps most disturbing to me - (and this, I suppose, is one of the deepest roots of my problem with atheistic evolution) - was the explanation given for human altruism. Altruism is explained as a more or less unique human attribute - where the infirm, disabled, or elderly are cared for in a way that goes beyond what we find in the animal kingdom. I would personally add that it could also extend to all notions of morality or sense of how we believe all people should live or think. The author (and as far as I’ve read, this is the explanation all atheistic evolutionists take) explains the existence of altruism in humans, by tying it to an ancient mutation from herd instinct.
My problem with this explanation of altruism is that it relegates any notion of right and wrong, any considerations of what’s best for society - political, religious, or otherwise - to nothing more than a random mutation adopted slowly over time by natural selection. This would functionally make any belief - or current debate in society - nothing more than random preferences each individual had coincidentally acquired from mutations in their ancient ancestor’s biological make-up. Essentially this belief would make all concerns whatever for what’s right or wrong meaningless - and completely futile to discuss or rally for (not to mention vote for). Nietzsche’s conclusions were right if all our notions of morality are merely the result of ancient random mutations.
As disturbing (and functionally impossible to live by I think) as this is, it actually goes further as well - and even effects human use of logic. If all of our brain function and reasoning ability is only a result of random mutation - why should we trust it? Why should we trust our belief in human theory on science or evolution, if logic itself is nothing more than a construction from a brain which itself is nothing more than the result of random mutation over time? C.S. Lewis was right in the 1940s when he argued that atheistic evolution is a self defeating view of the world. It cuts the legs off of the very stool it sits upon. If we should be skeptical of notions of our morality because they are merely the result of herd instinct - then we should be equally skeptical of our own minds - or even human logic itself because they are the result of similar instincts.
Ok. Rabbit hole done. No hard feelings to my good atheist friends - and I am truly interested in your thoughts on these things too.
In spite of my philosophical reservations on atheistic explanations of morality, this was an extremely enlightening read. I found it incredibly interesting. Lee has a knack for explaining complicated scientific jargon in layman’s terms. This is a great resource for a succinct modern account of the answers of modern atheistic scientific theory behind human evolution and the various scientific issues still being worked out. Though I disagreed with some of the blatant atheism, this was a very good entry level read for the pure science at hand. 3.5 stars rounded up.
Also: I’d like to delve in to this subject further. I’ve heard Harari’s ‘Sapiens’ is a good place to begin. Any other suggestions are welcome!
Well, I also don’t want to be ignorant of the findings of science - or shut myself into a tiny cloister away from all facts that may contradict my view. Truth is what I am interested in. So I saw this audiobook at a bargain price and snagged it up. I’m also not very well versed in paleo-anthropology - or science in general for that matter. (In fact I failed my high school bio class and managed to maneuver around it in college...) so I’d like to start dabbling in some science every now and then to make up for my general neglect of it.
This really was a fascinating listen. It is a compilation of articles written by Korean paleo-anthropologist Sang-Hee Lee that were previously published in her local science journal. The articles primarily deal with some of the most controversial findings and debates of, and within, the paleo-anthropology of human ancestry.
I’m personally still grappling with some of the information here, and where to place some of the early hominid cousins to humanity in my thinking. There are several: Neanderthal, who was intelligent and used tools but was more muscular and had an horizontally elongated skull with almost no forehead; Denisovans who were similar to Neanderthal but who we have very little in the way of fossils to know much about; (also Homo-floresiensis who were about 3 feet tall and for lack of a better description - basically resembled Tolkien’s hobbits - but may have just been an ape species;) and there are a few others as well. They are all, along with homo-sapiens, believed to have an undiscovered common ancestor that predates all discovered humanoid species.
Lee’s discussion of the scientific debate regarding where division of species occurs was also very interesting (chapter 21). There is much scientific debate as to whether these hominid fossils should be categorized as a different species from humanity, or whether these are merely extinct groups of human species. These groups did interbreed with humans after all. The DNA differences in these groups are also apparently not too dissimilar to that of different racial groups in modern humans.
It’s fairly straight forward how these fossils pose a potential problem for theists - or those who hold to a relatively literal view of the book of Genesis. The descriptions of Genesis describe a single creation of a man and a woman and from all appearances they are already human. As someone who believes humans were not evolved from animal species - but rather made directly by God, my current consideration is that God initially created the first human common ancestors - which all of these hominid species are originally from (including homo-sapiens) - and that these are all under the umbrella of what God considered to be the human species. I’m still considering some of these things.
The book also majorly focused on evolutionary explanations for all the ways humans significantly differ from animals. It was almost an evolutionary apologetic to explain these differences. Lee covered a multitude of these: from the vulnerability of human young and the duration of their need of family units, the reproduction cycle process, the difficulty of child birth, brain size, the need of simultaneous brain, skull, and facial muscle mutations to have occurred, omnivorous diet (rather than majoritively vegetarian like other primates), lack of fur, bipedalism, to the more refined differences - like: communication, art, and last - but probably most importantly - altruism. I honestly found the sheer amount of differences staggering, and was also surprised at how much evolutionary paleontologists seemed to be straining for explanations for these aspects in which we are so very different from our apparent animal forbears.
Pardon the philosophical rabbit hole here, but perhaps most disturbing to me - (and this, I suppose, is one of the deepest roots of my problem with atheistic evolution) - was the explanation given for human altruism. Altruism is explained as a more or less unique human attribute - where the infirm, disabled, or elderly are cared for in a way that goes beyond what we find in the animal kingdom. I would personally add that it could also extend to all notions of morality or sense of how we believe all people should live or think. The author (and as far as I’ve read, this is the explanation all atheistic evolutionists take) explains the existence of altruism in humans, by tying it to an ancient mutation from herd instinct.
My problem with this explanation of altruism is that it relegates any notion of right and wrong, any considerations of what’s best for society - political, religious, or otherwise - to nothing more than a random mutation adopted slowly over time by natural selection. This would functionally make any belief - or current debate in society - nothing more than random preferences each individual had coincidentally acquired from mutations in their ancient ancestor’s biological make-up. Essentially this belief would make all concerns whatever for what’s right or wrong meaningless - and completely futile to discuss or rally for (not to mention vote for). Nietzsche’s conclusions were right if all our notions of morality are merely the result of ancient random mutations.
As disturbing (and functionally impossible to live by I think) as this is, it actually goes further as well - and even effects human use of logic. If all of our brain function and reasoning ability is only a result of random mutation - why should we trust it? Why should we trust our belief in human theory on science or evolution, if logic itself is nothing more than a construction from a brain which itself is nothing more than the result of random mutation over time? C.S. Lewis was right in the 1940s when he argued that atheistic evolution is a self defeating view of the world. It cuts the legs off of the very stool it sits upon. If we should be skeptical of notions of our morality because they are merely the result of herd instinct - then we should be equally skeptical of our own minds - or even human logic itself because they are the result of similar instincts.
Ok. Rabbit hole done. No hard feelings to my good atheist friends - and I am truly interested in your thoughts on these things too.
In spite of my philosophical reservations on atheistic explanations of morality, this was an extremely enlightening read. I found it incredibly interesting. Lee has a knack for explaining complicated scientific jargon in layman’s terms. This is a great resource for a succinct modern account of the answers of modern atheistic scientific theory behind human evolution and the various scientific issues still being worked out. Though I disagreed with some of the blatant atheism, this was a very good entry level read for the pure science at hand. 3.5 stars rounded up.
Also: I’d like to delve in to this subject further. I’ve heard Harari’s ‘Sapiens’ is a good place to begin. Any other suggestions are welcome!
April 22, 2018
I gave this four stars on style points. I’ve read quite a lot on this subject and there were no news flashes for me (although there were a few interesting new takes on some of the established data). However, I am not part of the target audience for this book, it is intended for someone looking to get a basic understanding of paleoanthropology. For the intended reader the conversational writing style and lack of scientific jargon is perfect. Don’t get me wrong, this is no dumbed down effort. The information presented is valid and up to date. It’s something I’d like my granddaughter to read to stimulate an interest in science.
July 30, 2022
This book is an excellent study of the anthropology of early mankind and other members of the genus Homo. As a zoologist, I carefully studied the evolutionary history of humans. This book takes a look at the evidence of how early humans and related groups of animals (including chimpanzees, bonobos and even Neanderthals) lived historically and in some cases today. This is a great education for anyone interested. It will greatly expand the mind of the reader. The author is a professor who has learned the art of teaching and writing well. This book is a masterpiece.
July 27, 2018
A really enjoyable summary of current scientific evidence and thinking on human evolution, edited from columns published in a South Korean newspaper.
January 29, 2020
Audiobook, reader good.
A selection of breezy essays on paleoanthropology. They were originally written for publication a Korean magazine by Korean American author.
I found them enjoyable and would like to know more about some of the topics
A selection of breezy essays on paleoanthropology. They were originally written for publication a Korean magazine by Korean American author.
I found them enjoyable and would like to know more about some of the topics
January 28, 2019
Fun, easy to read book on the evolution of humans. This book is a sort of "appetizer" for the more thorough exploration of this topic as found in books like "Sapiens" by Yuval Noah Harari.
Read
February 13, 2019A collection of short essays by the paleoanthropologist. Interesting at points but nothing that knocked my socks off. She hypothesizes on how adults acquired the ability to process milk and suggests that white skin is an adaptation that may only go back 5,000 years or so. Her ideas on Neanderthals mirror the changes that most paleos now agree with that they had more culture and language than was previously thought. Her support for an earliest human ancestor from Asia, rather than Africa, is provocative not just because she happens to be Korean. Essays on Denisovans and the hobbits from Flores Island are hampered by lack of evidence. As is true for so much of palaeontology we need more bones to be discovered before anything definitive can be claimed. An okay book.
October 19, 2023
This book was actually so understandable! I enjoyed the unique (and sometimes quirky) storytelling by Lee, it truly helped me comprehend the paleoanthropological concepts so much better. Each topic is relevant and interesting without forcing a particular viewpoint on you. It’s definitely a book my parents could read!
November 16, 2021
I’m so unsure of this book. It might be because it’s actually a series of magazine articles. I learned some, some were interesting, in some there was too much information. If I came across them in a magazine that’s exactly what I’d do pick and choose.
December 7, 2017
i WON THIS BOOK ON GOODREADS. I REALLY LIKED IT. EVERY CHAPTER IS A DIFFERENT SUBJECT AND CAN BEEN READ IN ANY ORDER. IT IS ALSO WRITE SO THAT PEOPLE WITH OUT A DEGREE IN PALEOANTHROPOLOGY CAN UNDER STAND IT.
February 19, 2022
Entretenido en el sentido que a ratos muestra la historia paleoantropológica como anecdótica.
May 11, 2025
I like her social commentaries
July 20, 2025
Awesome overview on the origins of humans. And other evolutionary stuff. Super interesting and love the short essay collection format of the book.
January 28, 2020
First nonfiction book of the year! This book was fascinating, and I highly recommend it!
May 2, 2018
This is a very readable overview that addresses the (almost musical) questions of: All the kinds of people, where do they all come from? All the kinds of people, where do they all belong (cladistically)?
(Why Eleanor Rigby came to mine, I don't know.) It spends a fair amount of time contrasting the multi-regional vs. the total replacement theories of human evolution, and some of the implications thereof. It's a good summation of the subject, although a bit imprecise in its wording at times because it's targeted for a wide audience.
(Why Eleanor Rigby came to mine, I don't know.) It spends a fair amount of time contrasting the multi-regional vs. the total replacement theories of human evolution, and some of the implications thereof. It's a good summation of the subject, although a bit imprecise in its wording at times because it's targeted for a wide audience.
July 8, 2024
Close Encounters with Humankind: A Paleoanthropologist Investigates Our Evolving Species by Sang-Hee Lee
“The One Thing You Need to Know” is a wonderful book that examines twenty-one ideas in science. Award-winning author and scientist Marcus Chown provides readers with the one thing you need to know about some of the most interesting ideas in science. This instructive 257-page book includes the following twenty-one chapters: 1. Gravity. 2. Electricity, 3. Global Warming, 4. Why the Sun is Hot, 5. The Second Law of Thermodynamics, 6. Plate Tectonics, 7. Quantum Theory, 8. Atoms, 9. Evolution, 10. Special Relativity, 11. The Brain, 12. General Relativity, 13. Human Evolution, 14. Black Holes, 15. The Standard Model, 16. Quantum Computers, 17. Gravitational Waves, 18. The Higgs Field, 19. Antimatter, 20. Neutrinos, and 21. The Big Bang.
Positives:
1. A well-written, accessible book with a touch of humor.
2. A great topic, a look at science ideas with a focus on learning one thing from each idea.
3. The book is educational and fun to read. The chapters are at manageable levels and intended for the general public.
4. Good use of graphs and illustrations to help reader comprehension.
5. Every chapter begins with a chapter-appropriate quote.
6. Explains the relationship between electric and magnetic fields. “The relationship between electric and magnetic fields can be stated precisely: a changing electric field creates a magnetic field and a changing magnetic field creates an electric field.”
7. The key to Earth’s warming. “In fact, without the most important of all the heat-trapping molecules – water vapour – the planet would be a giant ball of ice with an average temperature of only -18 degrees Celsius.”
8. Examines the sun. “The sun, we know now, is powered by the gluing together of the cores, or nuclei, of the lightest element, hydrogen, to create nuclei of the second lightest element, helium. The byproduct of this nuclear fusion is sunlight.”
9. Understanding the second law of thermodynamics. “The answer is that the second law merely dictates that entropy must increase overall. This does not rule out the possibility of there being localized pockets where entropy decreases.”
10. The little known importance of plate tectonics. “Given that the constant burying of carbon dioxide by plate tectonics stops the build-up of the greenhouse gas in the atmosphere, the process may have been responsible for stabilizing the Earth’s climate over billions of years. It may therefore have played a key role in the evolution of life, which appeared at least 3.8 billion years ago.”
11. Find out one of the most shocking discoveries in science.
12. Evolution that even a caveman can understand. “Crucially, Darwin realized, the only ones to survive to reproduce are those with traits that enable them to best compete for that food. And these attributes are inherited by the next generation.”
13. Special relativity in simple terms. “Everything depends on the relative speed of observers, hence the label ‘relativity’ to describe Einstein’s theory. The speed of light turns out to be the rock on which the universe is built; space and time but shifting sand.”
14. The key to understanding the brain. “This strengthening and weakening of connections between neurons or the creation of new connections to modify the network is known as neuroplasticity.”
15. The theory of gravity in terms that a layperson can understand. “The American physicist John Wheeler came up with a very neat summary of the essence of Einstein’s theory of gravity: ‘Matter tells space-time how to curve. And curved space-time tells matter how to move.’”
16. Black holes defined. “A massive star at the end of its life, when it had run out of fuel to burn and was no longer generating heat to push outwards against the gravity trying to crush it, would become a black hole.”
17. The Standard Model explained. “The Standard Model is a theory of the ultimate building blocks of the world and how they are glued together. It describes how everything – from galaxies and stars to people – is ultimately made from just twelve different matter particles, which interact with each other by means of three non-gravitational forces, the whole thing being bound together by a very special particle known as the Higgs boson.”
18. Quantum computing the future is now. “A quantum computer simply exploits the ability of atoms and their like to do many things at once in order to do many calculations at once.”
19. Antimatter. “Nature has chosen to double the number of its basic building blocks. For every subatomic particle, remarkably there exists an ‘antiparticle’ with opposite properties such as electric charge.”
20. The big bang theory is no joke. “The basic big bang theory, in which the universe began in a hot, dense phase and has been expanding ever since, with the galaxies congealing out of the cooling debris, is beyond dispute. However, over the years, its predictions have been found to contradict observations and so it has been significantly modified by adding a number of new components. The three main bolt-ons are dark matter, dark energy and inflation.”
21. Includes glossary and endnotes.
Negatives:
1. Despite the intent to make this book accessible, some topics are still difficult to comprehend. Topics to do with quantum theory as an example is beyond the reach of the average person even at its most basic level.
2. Meant for the masses so if you have any formal education in any of the topics discussed you can certainly skip it.
In summary, this is a fun and instructive book to read. Chown’s purpose is to educate the general audience by focusing on key concepts for each science idea presented. The addition of humor gives the book a softening touch but rest assured some topics are still difficult for the average person to follow. Twenty-one science ideas are examined and with my background in engineering I found the book to be accessible and fun to read. I recommend it.
Further recommendations: “Brief Answers to the Big Questions” and “The Grand Design” by Stephen Hawking, “Why Does E=mc2?” and “Wonders of the Universe” by Brian Cox, “The Skeptics’ Guide to the Universe” by Steven Novella, “Relativity” by Albert Einstein, “The Big Picture” by Sean Carroll, “Cosmos” by Carl Sagan, “A Universe from Nothing” and “The Greatest Story Ever Told – So Far” by Lawrence Krauss, “The Future of Humanity” Michio Kaku, and “Origins” and “Death by Black Hole” by Neil deGrasse Tyson.
“The One Thing You Need to Know” is a wonderful book that examines twenty-one ideas in science. Award-winning author and scientist Marcus Chown provides readers with the one thing you need to know about some of the most interesting ideas in science. This instructive 257-page book includes the following twenty-one chapters: 1. Gravity. 2. Electricity, 3. Global Warming, 4. Why the Sun is Hot, 5. The Second Law of Thermodynamics, 6. Plate Tectonics, 7. Quantum Theory, 8. Atoms, 9. Evolution, 10. Special Relativity, 11. The Brain, 12. General Relativity, 13. Human Evolution, 14. Black Holes, 15. The Standard Model, 16. Quantum Computers, 17. Gravitational Waves, 18. The Higgs Field, 19. Antimatter, 20. Neutrinos, and 21. The Big Bang.
Positives:
1. A well-written, accessible book with a touch of humor.
2. A great topic, a look at science ideas with a focus on learning one thing from each idea.
3. The book is educational and fun to read. The chapters are at manageable levels and intended for the general public.
4. Good use of graphs and illustrations to help reader comprehension.
5. Every chapter begins with a chapter-appropriate quote.
6. Explains the relationship between electric and magnetic fields. “The relationship between electric and magnetic fields can be stated precisely: a changing electric field creates a magnetic field and a changing magnetic field creates an electric field.”
7. The key to Earth’s warming. “In fact, without the most important of all the heat-trapping molecules – water vapour – the planet would be a giant ball of ice with an average temperature of only -18 degrees Celsius.”
8. Examines the sun. “The sun, we know now, is powered by the gluing together of the cores, or nuclei, of the lightest element, hydrogen, to create nuclei of the second lightest element, helium. The byproduct of this nuclear fusion is sunlight.”
9. Understanding the second law of thermodynamics. “The answer is that the second law merely dictates that entropy must increase overall. This does not rule out the possibility of there being localized pockets where entropy decreases.”
10. The little known importance of plate tectonics. “Given that the constant burying of carbon dioxide by plate tectonics stops the build-up of the greenhouse gas in the atmosphere, the process may have been responsible for stabilizing the Earth’s climate over billions of years. It may therefore have played a key role in the evolution of life, which appeared at least 3.8 billion years ago.”
11. Find out one of the most shocking discoveries in science.
12. Evolution that even a caveman can understand. “Crucially, Darwin realized, the only ones to survive to reproduce are those with traits that enable them to best compete for that food. And these attributes are inherited by the next generation.”
13. Special relativity in simple terms. “Everything depends on the relative speed of observers, hence the label ‘relativity’ to describe Einstein’s theory. The speed of light turns out to be the rock on which the universe is built; space and time but shifting sand.”
14. The key to understanding the brain. “This strengthening and weakening of connections between neurons or the creation of new connections to modify the network is known as neuroplasticity.”
15. The theory of gravity in terms that a layperson can understand. “The American physicist John Wheeler came up with a very neat summary of the essence of Einstein’s theory of gravity: ‘Matter tells space-time how to curve. And curved space-time tells matter how to move.’”
16. Black holes defined. “A massive star at the end of its life, when it had run out of fuel to burn and was no longer generating heat to push outwards against the gravity trying to crush it, would become a black hole.”
17. The Standard Model explained. “The Standard Model is a theory of the ultimate building blocks of the world and how they are glued together. It describes how everything – from galaxies and stars to people – is ultimately made from just twelve different matter particles, which interact with each other by means of three non-gravitational forces, the whole thing being bound together by a very special particle known as the Higgs boson.”
18. Quantum computing the future is now. “A quantum computer simply exploits the ability of atoms and their like to do many things at once in order to do many calculations at once.”
19. Antimatter. “Nature has chosen to double the number of its basic building blocks. For every subatomic particle, remarkably there exists an ‘antiparticle’ with opposite properties such as electric charge.”
20. The big bang theory is no joke. “The basic big bang theory, in which the universe began in a hot, dense phase and has been expanding ever since, with the galaxies congealing out of the cooling debris, is beyond dispute. However, over the years, its predictions have been found to contradict observations and so it has been significantly modified by adding a number of new components. The three main bolt-ons are dark matter, dark energy and inflation.”
21. Includes glossary and endnotes.
Negatives:
1. Despite the intent to make this book accessible, some topics are still difficult to comprehend. Topics to do with quantum theory as an example is beyond the reach of the average person even at its most basic level.
2. Meant for the masses so if you have any formal education in any of the topics discussed you can certainly skip it.
In summary, this is a fun and instructive book to read. Chown’s purpose is to educate the general audience by focusing on key concepts for each science idea presented. The addition of humor gives the book a softening touch but rest assured some topics are still difficult for the average person to follow. Twenty-one science ideas are examined and with my background in engineering I found the book to be accessible and fun to read. I recommend it.
Further recommendations: “Brief Answers to the Big Questions” and “The Grand Design” by Stephen Hawking, “Why Does E=mc2?” and “Wonders of the Universe” by Brian Cox, “The Skeptics’ Guide to the Universe” by Steven Novella, “Relativity” by Albert Einstein, “The Big Picture” by Sean Carroll, “Cosmos” by Carl Sagan, “A Universe from Nothing” and “The Greatest Story Ever Told – So Far” by Lawrence Krauss, “The Future of Humanity” Michio Kaku, and “Origins” and “Death by Black Hole” by Neil deGrasse Tyson.
April 22, 2018
The articles were interesting enough and written in an enjoyable manner, just no real conclusions, a lot of it might have been this or it might have been that so out didn't really grab me. I just skimmed through it.
September 15, 2018
In my attempts to imbibe everything that has been written about human evolution, I also read this book, but I was disappointed. I admit that I am not among the target audience, however, I nevertheless was irritated about the shallow treatment of the topic. Sang-Hee Lee considers the Neanderthal genetic legacy in the human genome as evidence for Neanderthal being ancestral to Homo sapiens, which I believe is a wrong interpretation of the literature. Also I don't like her assertion that the "European" 19th century view of Neanderthal as a brute savage has a parallel in European colonialism. Finally, her ideas about the multiregional origin of H. sapiens are contrary to genetic data, even if modified by new estimates of mutation rates.
November 23, 2017
I think Sang-Hee Lee, a paleoanthropologist, did a really good job with this book. It's a collection of essays, that cover many topics, that try to answer many questions, but also have you thinking and wondering. The section titled "Got Milk?" had me asking a lot questions and may just be my favorite section. Great job Sang-Hee Lee, and thanks for allowing me to review this book for you. I won this great book on GoodReads and like I do with most my wins I will be paying it forward by giving my win either to a friend or library to enjoy.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 140 reviews