Customer Reviews

Darwin and Evolution for Kids: His Life and Ideas with 21 Activities (For Kids series)

5 star:		(8)
4 star:		(1)
3 star:		(0)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(2)

 

 

If you are looking for a book to give your child a foundation in evolution for future science study, there are better options available. I caution any fellow parents against this book.

We can be certain the author is not a scientist, for she fails to address a very important basis for all scientific theories. In our culture the word "theory" means "idea." However, in science, a theory is not an idea at all. In scientific research, for an hypothesis to reach designation as a theory, it must undergo rigorous, multi-step tests that prove many facts to be true. All "theories" in science have been tested to prove hundreds and even thousands of supportive facts. Gravitational Theory is not an "idea." Rather, we know it to be true. Evolution has thousands of supportive facts that no scientist has been able to disprove over the course of 150 years.

The book does not explain modern genetics' entire basis in Evolution. You cannot understand genetics without accepting Darwin's theory of evolution. There are no descriptions of inheritance, mutation, or the types of selection. Without these fundamentals, a book about evolution (even geared toward kids) is inadequate.

A better choice for your kids is probably here: by Daniel Loxton (Author, Illustrator)Evolution: How We and All Living Things Came to Be

Also, there are some amazing NOVA programs available:
NOVA - Origins
The following is actually a documentary on the Dover School Board controversy. It is very thorough in its explanation of how/why Intelligent Design is not science and how the idea of irreducible complexity fails in scientific testing. This is explained through the details of testimony from the 2005 Supreme Court hearings. Judgment Day - Intelligent Design on Trial

Darwin and Evolution for Kids may still be a great choice for you. This selection is appropriate for religious parents and homeschoolers who want their children to remain in the dark (or at least in the shadows) and see Darwin as "What a strange man!" and the man who "married his cousin." Much of the wording has no place in a book on science, and does not help children make a truly educated analysis. One of the other reviews is very helpful in pointing out the book's inaccuracies.

Whether you embrace Evolution or not, I wish your child only the BEST in his or her science education!

This book is a pleasure to read with our 8yr old son. We haven't completed it as of yet, but it's one of our favorites. The activies are fun for the whole family to take part in. We are a homeschooling family and wanted our son to learn about evolution, and this book does it.

I found this book at the Darwin Exhibit at the American Natural History Museum in New York. It really tells three stories: the life of Charles Darwin, the state of science in his lifetime and all the scientists who were formulating supporting evidence, and the theory of evolution. It treats the subject of religion respectfully, but makes clear the difference between religious faith and science theory. I plan to give it to our elementary and middle school libraries. Every library should have one.

I confess that at the age of 44 I read and was spellbound by Kristan Lawson's book. My wife a museum educator came home with this book. She said, "Look at this book I ordered; what do you think?"

I'm have a minor in biology, so was familiar with Darwin and his theories, but never read anything by him or knew in detail anything about his life. I started flipping through the book and was instantly hooked. I read it in two sittings and must say it is well written entertaining and filled in many gaps in my knowledge of Darwin, his life, and the impact he had on the world.

Some things which intrigued me:
1. He was a miserable student in college
2. He wrote many books on many subjects
3. He spent 8 years studying and writing about barnacles!
4. He wrote the first book on carnivorous plants.
5. His last and most popular book was on the lowly earthworm, which European gardeners snapped up!
6. Finally, he was a very shy and timid man who hated publicity and would not debate his ideas in public.

This is a great read for anyone who knows a little about Darwin, but does not have a complete picture of who he was. A pure pleasure of a read!

I was absolutely floored by how good this book was as both a biography and also an introduction to the basic arguments, counterarguments, challenges, and triumphs of the theory of evolution. Every major objection is touched on: half a wing, the divine watchmaker, the "lack" of transitional forms, "blending" of mutations back into the wild type. The book even covers the Scopes trial, the modern synthesis, and the issue of Social Darwinism. And the story of Darwin himself is compellingly and fairly told. The theory itself is explained in straightforward terms that are easily understood, and the objections are dealt with intellgently and rationally.

Bravo, Kristan Lawson. This book is a tour de force of clear explanation and fascinating character study.

This is an outstanding book for children, and adults as well. This wonderfully laid out science book, succinctly addresses the "when, where, why, and how" life on this planet began. By encouraging readers to define the difference between theories and beliefs, facts and opinions, "Darwin and Evolution for Kids" addresses religiously inspired debates with fact and eloquently and tells the story of evolution.

I was more looking for great activities for my classroom but most of this book is a history of Charles Darwin and his life's work with random activities dispersed throughout. The writing is well done and its an easy read for kids.

I spent the last 2 months pouring through this book with my 12-year old, off and on, and sometimes spending an hour on an entire page. I felt it was very appropriate for her age, especially since we read it together. This book enabled us to cover SO MANY subjects in thorough detail. Not only is the subject of evolution fully explored with arguments in favor of and against, but the book is also somewhat cross-curricular in that it explores issues of slavery (Darwin was very put off by it), geology (the age of the Earth and the rocks and things found in it), archeology (Darwin actually found many fossils of prehistoric mega-mammals which he sent back to England), geography (the Beagle's trip around the world is featured in full detail), and even psychology (the captain of the Beagle was a real piece of work, to be polite -- Darwin had to learn to get along with him). This book has a special kid-friendliness in that it is often interrupted with side stories and activities. For example, when explaining where Darwin was born (Shrewsbury, England), the book provides a recipe for Shrewsbury cakes (thus providing us with a first-hand learning experience in how awful English food actually is -- no offense to you Brits out there).

Very informative, thorough and well-written. I enjoyed reviewing the science I had not studied since high school (maybe college). Not for little kids, though. The length and reading level make it more suitable to middle school kids in AP classes or for HS students for independent reading and maybe for younger kids if a parent reads it to them. Way too advanced for my high school ESL kids.

Lawson's book Darwin and Evolution for Kids is engagingly written and nicely presented. It has won some very positive reviews and NSTA-CBC endorsement. Nonetheless, it is a poor source for factually correct information. Lawson misrepresents the history of evolutionary thinking before Darwin; the role of the Bible and of the Catholic Church in Medieval culture; the validity of Malthus's theories of human population growth; the economic effects of the Industrial Revolution on worker standard of living; evolutionary explanations based on species being related; distinctions between scientific claims and non-scientific claims; and the nature of both scientific and religious inquiry. His book also suffers from many technical errors that may come back to haunt students who take a real biology course in high school or junior high. For example, Lawson misdefines "genetic drift" (p. 132) as follows:

"Genetic drift means that some traits may arise at random that are neither helpful nor harmful to an organism's chances for survival. New genes may also appear that have no effect on an organism's form."

Many biology students will probably recognize that this is a definition of "neutral mutation", not of "genetic drift" (which instead refers to the accumulation of random changes in allele frequencies in a population). Such errors and confusions in basic biology concepts and terminology undermine the book's attempts to present the scientific content of evolutionary theory.

Some examples of historical and factual errors (and possible corrections) in Chapter 1 (pages 1-11) are as follows.

Lawson: The Catholic Church reigned supreme in Europe from about 400-1400 A.D.

Correction: Europe had a complex history of local rulers and peoples struggling for supremacy between 400 and 1400. None emerged as a supreme ruler, and the survival and independence of the Catholic Church were often in doubt. Some of the powerful groups competing for the conquest and reign of Europe between 400 and 1400 included: Islamic invaders; Germanic kings (one of whom deposed the Catholic Pope), tribes, and emperors; Viking raiders; barbarian hordes (Magyars and others), Turks, the Byzantine Empire, and the Holy Roman Emperors. Lawson's claim that "The Catholic Church reigned supreme in Europe from about 400-1400 A.D." is incorrect and misrepresents this thousand years of European history. www.etss.edu/hts/hts2/notes21.htm, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Schism

Lawson: While the Catholic Church reigned supreme in Europe (400-1400 A.D.), "evolutionary thinking disappeared entirely".

Correction: The theory of evolution by natural selection was articulated by Moslem scholars during this period (in the ninth century, while the Moslem empire ruled in Spain and other parts of Europe) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_medicine

Lawson: During the supreme reign of the Catholic Church, from about 400-1100 A.D., belief in the literal truth of the Bible was enforced by law.

Correction: During the Middle Ages, from about 400-1400 A.D., Catholic and Jewish scholars questioned and challenged the meanings of Biblical passages. Symbolic and allegorical interpretations of the Bible were an important part of medieval culture. www.experiencefestival.com/a/Hermeneutics_-_Medieval_hermeneutics/id/1292296

Lawson: During the supreme reign of the Catholic Church, from about 400-1100 A.D., the ancient philosophers were forgotten.

Correction: During the Dark and Middle Ages, from about 400-1400 A.D., the Catholic Church preserved the thinking of ancient philosophers, against great odds (especially, attacks on civilization by barbarians), and prevented the ancient philosophers from being forgotten. The ideas of ancient philosophers such as Aristotle and Plato were closely studied and profoundly influenced the teachings of the Catholic Church. http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/aquinas; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Influence_of_Hellenic_philosophy_on_Christianity

Lawson: Scientific discoveries, such as that the Earth moves around the Sun, showed that the Bible is not always literally correct.

Comment: The key roles of non-literal interpretations (symbolism, poetry, metaphor, allegory, and story) in the Bible were well recognized over 1000 years before Copernicus, and contributed to the development of a rich tradition of biblical hermeneutics in the Middle Ages.

Lawson: Malthus emphasized that there were too many people in the world.

Correction: Malthus predicted that unchecked population growth in England and other countries *would* eventually lead to mass starvation or other disasters *if* nothing were done to prevent population growth from exceeding growth in food supply.

Lawson: Darwin understood that the same [Malthusian] laws apply to all other animals as well as humans: most baby animals never grow up, because they starve or are eaten.

Comment: Malthus's predictions turned out to be false. Food supply grew much faster, not slower, than populations, in England and other countries. Unlike other species, humans reduced their population growth rates as they became more prosperous. p. 55 of New Ideas from Dead Economists, by T.G. Buchholz, notes that, while philosophers like Malthus were speculating about the fate of man, "[E]ighteenth-century farmers were perfecting powerful methods to expand output. ... [F]rom 1700 to 1800, output per worker doubled in England... Several innovations account for the leap, including crop rotation, seed selection, better tools, and the use of horses instead of oxen, reducing plowing time by almost 50 percent. By 1750, rapid progress allowed England not only to feed her citizens, but to export an additional percent in cereals and flours. ... In the United States today, only a small percentage of the population is needed to feed all America and export millions of tons of food abroad."

Lawson: Darwin correctly reasoned that evolution was the *only* possible explanation for the striking similarities between species: different species are related to each other (sharing common ancestors), and so have common traits.

Correction: This (monophyletic) evolution is *not* the only possible explanation for striking similarities between species. Species that are not closely related to each other may still develop striking similarities (such as wings of birds, bats, and pterodactyls). Such "convergent evolution" provides one example of how similarities can arise without common ancestry.

Lawson: Before about 1800, English society consisted of fabulously wealthy aristocrats at the top and poor, hungry, and downtrodden peasants at the bottom. The Industrial Revolution brought about a new, rapidly growing, middle class.

Correction: The middle class in England developed with the rise of towns, around 1000-1200 A.D. The English middle class was well developed by 1215 A.D. (signing of the Magna Carta) and helped to govern England in subsequent centuries. The Industrial Revolution did not create the middle class, but created a new class of fabulously wealthy industrial capitalists and also hugely improved the standard of living for all classes. www.econlib.org/library/Enc/IndustrialRevolutionandtheStandardofLiving.html

Lawson: The Industrial Revolution led to crowded, dirty, and poverty-stricken cities. The poor were still poor - they just had different jobs, in uglier surroundings. The Industrial Revolution brought difficulties for workers, but was interpreted as progress by other Victorians.

Correction: The Industrial Revolution reduced poverty and hugely improved the standard of living for all classes. Even Karl Marx acknowledged that workers benefited tremendously in improved standard of living from the Industrial Revolution: "But in Capital, written in the face of irrefutable evidence that workers were better off than they had been, [Marx] retreats, claiming only that workers have a smaller share of the wealth [but are better off in absolute terms] than before", Buchholz, p. 141. See also www.econlib.org/library/Enc/IndustrialRevolutionandtheStandardofLiving.html.

Lawson: "A scientist is convinced that a theory is correct because it is the best way to explain known facts."

Correction: Scientists often disagree - sometimes passionately - about the best way to explain known facts. They use experiments to test rival theories. Many theories that most scientists once believed offered the best way to explain known facts - such as the theories of spontaneous generation, phlogiston, and the ether - were later discarded after experiments failed to confirm their predictions. (Kuhn's Structure of Scientific Revolutions presents a very different account from Lawson's about how scientists form convictions and interpret evidence, typically based on fit to a prevailing paradigm.)

Lawson: "A religious person holds a belief because he or she feels that it is true, or because a holy person or document says it is true. ..."[R]eligious beliefs are not based on the world of science at all."

Correction: Many famous religious persons, such as Descartes and Isaac Newton, held religious beliefs because they concluded that such beliefs provided the best way to explain already known facts (such as that people think and can make choices.)

Today, many scientists hold religious beliefs because they have concluded that these beliefs provide the best way to explain recently discovered facts about the natural world of science (such as the apparent "fine-tuning" of conditions in the universe to support evolution and life). For these people, religious beliefs are supported by the world of science. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fine-tuned_universe

Lawson: "A religious belief can never be proved or disproved."

Correction and comments: Religious beliefs, like scientific beliefs, can be disproved if they make testable predictions that turn out to be wrong. For example, the Millerite religious belief that Christ would return in 1844 was disproved when he did not do so.

Many people (such as the French philosopher and mathematician Descartes) have held that religious beliefs can be proved through evidence and reason.

Some people believe that important religious beliefs are proved by direct observation (witnessing or revelation). Such observations are usually private and not experimentally repeatable.

Lawson: "Only facts ["information that can be tested or documented"] can be proved."

Correction: Many truths of mathematics and logic (such as Fermat's Last Theorem or Gödel's Theorems) can be proved, even though they are not "facts" according to Lawson's definition (they do not consist of empirical information that can be tested or documented.) Many philosophers over the centuries have believed that at least facts about God can be proved by reason, similarly to truths of mathematics and logic.

Lawson: "The real difference between religious beliefs and scientific theories is that beliefs cannot be questioned or challenged, because they are seen as coming from God."

Correction: Both religious beliefs and scientific claims can be (and have been) extensively questioned, challenged, and modified over time. However, only scientific claims (which are typically about *how* the world works) can be tested experimentally. Religious claims (which are typically about *why* the world works as it does, or about how we should respond to it) are tested in other ways, such as by coherence with experiences of the natural world and of our relations with others.

www.youtube.com/watch?v=e1tfWtCZB_A

Comment: Lawson's book ignores another "real difference between religious beliefs and scientific theories". Religious beliefs differ from scientific theories in the kinds of questions about the world that they are capable of addressing. Religion addresses questions such as: What is my calling in life (and how am I called?) Is God real, and, if so, what relation with God should I seek? How? How should we interpret and respond to evil? How should I live? Why am I conscious? How are moral choices possible, and what kinds of choices make people better or worse? Such questions are extremely important (and interesting), but they are not scientific questions. (The distinction between religious and scientific questions is addressed further in books by the physicist and priest Polkinghorne.) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Polkinghorne


The above list of examples of mistaken, misleading, and unwarranted statements is from just the first 11 pages (Chapter 1) of Lawson's book. Others occur in the rest of the book; enumerating all of them (for example, on molecular mechanisms of evolution) would require a much longer review.


Some parents (and scholars) may be offended by Lawson's dismissive description of religious belief as being based only on feeling or authority, in contrast to the views of religious scholars who "hold that faith is merely the virtue by which we hold to our reasoned ideas, despite moods to the contrary" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faith).

On scientific method, Lawson's explanation of "facts, theories, and beliefs" (p. 10) is muddled. It omits the crucial roles of hypotheses, speculation, and inference in science. It suggests that searching for explanations based on reasoning from observed evidence belongs exclusively to science, but not to religion.

Catholic parents should be aware that Lawson's portrayal of the role of the Catholic Church in medieval Europe emphasizes an unattributed picture of tortures (p. 3)and does not mention the Catholic Church's roles in preserving and sustaining Western civilization throughout the Dark Ages (nor that that tortures used by the Catholic inquisitors -- which never occurred in England -- were less severe than those in general use at the time by secular courts, www.experiencefestival.com/a/Medieval_Inquisition_-_Inquisition_procedure/id/1756302.)

Lawson inexplicably ignores the contributions of Islam to evolutionary theory and to European science and scholarship during the Middle Ages (including the first fully articulated theory of evolution based on natural selection, in the ninth century).

Some possible web sites to complement and correct the material in this book might include the following:

http://anthro.palomar.edu/evolve/evolve_2.htm

http://www.emc.maricopa.edu/faculty/farabee/BIOBK/BioBookEVOLI.html

http://evolvethought.blogspot.com/2005/06/misunderstanding-evolution.html

Parents unconcerned with accuracy in history, biology, or religion, but interested in teaching their children to dismiss all religious beliefs and thinking as unreasonable, authoritarian, and irrelevant to the world of science, may find Darwin and Evolution for Kids useful in encouraging children to adopt these beliefs.