This is an excellent, up-to date (2003), fairly easy read of an astounding place, Rapa Nui, the island in the South Pacific better known as Easter Island. This is in fact an updated edition of an earlier 1992 edition, that has been revised to incorporate new ideas and developments in research into a place which has seen quite a deal of academic interest and debate over the last few decades.

It is, as the title suggests, mostly a discussion of some of the more enigmatic and mysterious aspects of this small island at the 'edge of the world', so to speak. Discussions include how the Polynesians got there in the first place (several thousand kilometres from just about anywhere), what happened to the island's original flora and fauna, why there are now virtually no trees on the island, why and how they built and transported the enormous statues, why their culture seemingly underwent several periods of cultural implosion, and how they came to have their own system of rudimentary symbolic writing-no small thing incidentally- since it is only one of a handful of societies where a form of writing is thought to have arisen independently (although this is debated for Easter Island).

Rest assured, once one delves into the detail and human richness of the history and culture on Easter Island, (past what one hears via the grapevine or via populist travel articles), one begins to find things one did not quite expect. Put simply, it becomes a kind of mirror of the human psyche, of humans in close interaction with their primeval environment, with all its ghastliness and beauty, and their myriad inclinations towards both the tragic and the beautiful.

Take for example, the extreme feeling of isolation that a seafaring culture must have felt, of being stranded, once all the original tree species had been cut down and driven to extinction, and they couldn't make any more sea craft (something a number of environmentalists have pointed out). Imagine the keen loss of traditional values that must have been felt, once the statues were thrown down (in a probable revolution of some sort), or the desperate alternative worship of man-like birds, who could fly away into the sea and escape their lonely, now barren, isle. And what about the island's trees in the first place-there was a highly prized native palm on the island, that could be sourced to transport statues, make ropes, make sea craft, and provide an alcoholic sap amongst other things, which was driven to extinction by the islanders-whether by over-exploitation, neglect, or through an inability to adapt and change, or all of them. And there are even suggestions that is was in the making and transporting of the statues themselves which at least partially caused the islander's ultimate cultural downfall-the transport of the statues required the felling of timber, and if one of these two practices had to cease or change, it probably wasn't the felling of timber.

It is difficult to know for certain what variety of factors were responsible for the extinction of the prized trees, but no doubt isolation, neglect, and an inability to change must have been major factors. In addition, the Polynesian rat evidently had a big appetite for native palm nuts (teeth marks in nuts). Without the timber from the trees, soil erosion and degradation set in, and most importantly they couldn't make wooden boats to fish, and so they began to starve. Archaeological evidence also indicates an outbreak of warfare at about the same time as the trees became extinct. There is indeed a myriad of archaeological evidence here to delight anyone interested in the rise and fall of nations and cultures to be sure, scattered in caves, swamps, dwellings, quarries and various other places on the island.

Another interesting discovery is the preserved fossilised roots of native palm trees, which are almost identical to the modern day, very versatile Chilean species. Also of interest to me was the subtle development from religious ritual and symbolism, to depiction of the same on favourable rock outcrops, ultimately to communication of the same on wooden articles-the Rongorongo script. In short-'religious ritual' to 'writing'. Writing originating as art inspired by cultural isolation? There are suggestions here that it was the Spanish who influenced this trend towards writing, but after reading the debate here, I'm not convinced. The extreme isolation to me suggests a kind of inspired artistic innovation or expression. Readers might also be surprised to learn that the origin of the Polynesians themselves is from Taiwan in about 4000 BC-an island nation, that has frequent political troubles, and I presume also may have had, around 4000 BC??.

There are various other discussions on the geology, geography, climate, the infamous Kon Tiki expedition, genetic research into islander origins, Polynesian dispersal and seafaring, archaeological excavations (of course), agriculture, general ecology, statues and ceremonies, food issues, the western human impact from the 18th century onwards, the introduction of smallpox, western religion, slave trading from Peru in the 19th century, and revised views on issues concerning resource sustainability, and ultimate parallels with the rest of the world. It is worth mentioning here that the first edition received some criticism for failing to note differences in resource availability with continental landmasses (which have a larger degree of alternative resources, and further discoveries of eg minerals), and these issues have been incorporated in this revised edition. Comparisons are also made with two other pacific islands, although in somewhat limited detail, Mangaia and Tikopia, which experienced similar ecological and cultural crises, but apparently managed to 'see them through'. There are also a number of black and white and colour plates, and quite a few diagrams which provide good support to the discussions.

An excellent overview of a thoroughly fascinating, and always surprising place.

This is a difficult book to read, or review. It is very rich in detail, and politically charged. Put simply, it discusses in detail the old gene-culture/nature-nurture relationship, highlighting in particular how many social structures and various ideologies are in fact rooted in an outmoded view of human nature-the so-called "Blank Slate", or tabular rasa. (Even our language is rife with it, although this is gradually changing). The book's value above the average however, in this widely debated genre, is that it isn't just a rehash of what everybody knows-that the truth for most of these things lies somewhere in between-rather it details just how many 'Blank Slate'-type assumptions people *unconsciously* follow, particularly within both politics and the humanities, but which are being progressively disproved by observational science. It is also very up to date with current research in a range of fields including economics, evolutionary psychology, history, ecology, biology, philosophy, neurology etc.

It highlights in particular how humanity can actually benefit from various biological discoveries, in particular in terms of socio-political theory and resistance to various political ideologies. (A common underlying theme of the book is that resistance to the corruption of power may be best attempted through facing the realities of what science says about ourselves, rather than by denying or ignoring it). It attempts to show that despite common misconceptions, the progressive harmonising of biology into social theory is providing a range of positive social benefits and new discoveries. These are too many to be detailed here, but include a range of discussions on violence, gender, the arts, politics, children and education, history, inequality, imperfectibility, determinism, and nihilism.

Who would have thought Galapagonian finches could have had anything to do with collective farming, or Nazi youth camps? Or that the geology of cold and lonely rock outcrops on the coast of Scotland, and world geography and trade (location, location, location-Mr Diamond), could have anything to do with education, raising our children, farming, or increasing our health?

Mr Pinker brings a range of scientific discoveries into a stream of age-old socio-political views, with a flamboyance and freshness that is long overdue. The Noble Savage, the Blank Slate, the Ghost in the machine, (if you haven't heard much about these-you are in for a crash course) and several other common old assumptions and ideas are discussed in the light of new discoveries in the natural and human (actually these two are the same thing) world.

Slowly but inevitably, old ideas, many rooted in misguided political ideologies, (or in some cases the fear of them), are breaking down like the proverbial Berlin Wall. The reason for them to be simply exists no longer. Or to put it more accurately, perhaps there never was a good reason for many of them to be. (Other than, perhaps, the psycho-social benefits of wishful thinking, as Mr Pinker alludes to in George Orwell's 1984-those who swallow the party line best are generally those who can't comprehend it). Or perhaps it may be best said that old ideas are gradually being cast aside, because there are better and more peaceful ways of living in the world.

Mr Pinker's understanding of social theory and human nature is generally very sound. But I did have a few quibbles with some of his discussions. I don't think, for example, that Mr Pinker's strong reliance on the 'left versus right' political dichotomy is ultimately true to reality, and I also think that he himself overstates his case at times. (eg 'The Tragic Vision is turning out to be true'- the term 'tragic' itself is contextual and relative-something strong in biological theory, and also eg the 'universality of ethnocentrism'-strictly speaking nothing really is ever universal in the *absolute* sense-eg spandrels and biological co-option abounds). But he does present his arguments with an astuteness and a flair for language and the written word that is quite rare.

The general theme of this book is that our biological heritage does not constrain us, so much as enrich us. The devil is in the detail (too many to discuss in short review), but it is a sad fact that much of our social heritage has blinded us to this fact, for too long. Such details are discussed at length in this book.

It is a long book, politically very sensitive, very detailed, but worth ploughing through to the end. In the genre of nature/nurture and evolutionary-social theory it is indeed amongst the very best, as my work collegues also attest.

This book posed a few intriguing questions for me, in which animal lovers, biologists, social theorists and others might also be interested. The authors have backgrounds in animal behaviour, neuroscience in animals, and animal communication, cognition and welfare.

Dogs belong to the family Canidae, ground-living carnivores with around 36 species, although some of these species interbreed. The lineage is around 40-50 million years old, originating in North America. They reached Europe around 5-7 million years ago, where the well known grey wolf is though to have evolved, who then passed back into North America, amongst other places, around 700,000 years ago. All domestic dogs appear to derive from one ancestral species-Canus lupus-the grey wolf. Latest evidence suggests dogs were first domesticated around 135,000 years ago, perhaps as old as early homo sapien (p12).

A variety of wild dog characteristics can be found in the domestic versions, with some notable exceptions.

Short-sightedness is probably a domestic trait only (p45). All dogs move their ears and head around to pinpoint location-originally location of prey. Domestic dogs have two photopigments in their eyes, unlike humans with three, meaning they are slightly colour blind (compared to us). Smell is, of course, well developed, and they can tell which direction an animal/person was moving-an important hunting ability (p49). Wild pups must not stray from the den, and so domesticates can reasonably learn to stay at home. Howling (in wolves) is used to increase distances between clans and individuals. (I think there is more here-sex?, hunting prospects?, group development?). Sniffing in all dogs is intimately related to pair bonding and territorial marking. There is a variety of vocalisation forms in wild dogs, such as short distance barks, yelps, and whining, with some co-opted for dog-human communication-eg human sentence upwards inflections reflect some whining communication, etc. Barking, though variable in type and frequency, occurs in all canids, despite common misconceptions. Regurgitating food to the young is also common to all canids (I have a collie who as a puppy managed to steal my dinner from my mouth once-totally innocently of course).

Grey wolves, as opposed to some other canids, have a strong vertical social structure. Occasionally submissiveness is ignored by a superior, due to hierarchal threat, or occasionally the inferior won't submit, and an individual may occasionally be forced out of a clan entirely (sound familiar? p94).

Also of interest is that African wild dogs have a flatter social structure than grey wolves, which appears to be proportional to their 'harsher' environment-that is, elements of in-group competition and in-group rivalry are reduced when conditions become more hazardous-group hierarchy in this sense is an evolved 'luxury', so to speak (p103-104). (This idea has interesting implications to social inequality in humans). Also, species which have a high degree of predatory enemies have less infighting and high co-operation rates (p141). Also of note is that an African wild dog rejected by its clan has little chance of survival from both predators and through stress-induced immune deficiency.

In a social hierarchy, ritualised and stereotyped acts are common (sound familiar?). Sometimes a group of young males may turn on an alpha male and expel or kill him (sound familiar)?. Interestingly, being an alpha male may not relate to being the best hunter-appearance, confidence and adherence to social rituals give social status, not killing/athletic success.

In many clans every female comes into oestrus at the same time, and pseudo pregnancies also occur in females within a clan, where they produce milk and may even suckle pups not of their own-obviously a group survival strategy (p114). (It is not clear whether this only occurs in related individuals-selfish gene theorists take note!). Higher levels of oestrogen in African wild dogs create more male pups in their litters (p117). I am also aware that sometimes pups within a litter have different fathers.

The larger the pack the larger the prey that is hunted (p123). Dingos in Australia also use deception in hunting. Interestingly, wolves in captivity are known to watch gatekeepers open latches and learn to do this themselves, whilst domesticates generally do not (p147). Also, wolves wait until the coast is clear before attempting to escape. This 'escape intelligence' has obviously been somewhat nullified by domestication. However, wolves are not willing to learn tricks, unlike domesticates. Dogs are also better than chimps in reading a persons eyes-a trait of group hunting (p158-9). 'Glancing' is observed in dogs between food bowls and owners, or between balls and owners.
It is also suggested that human smell is so poor partly because we have used dogs for hunting in our recent evolutionary history (p165-6). (It has even been suggested elsewhere that language may have been facilitated by this reduction in our need for smell, whereby flatter faces and the migration of the larynx to the back of the throat increased vocalisation range).

The future of the wild dog is unclear. It is stated that many rehabilitation and reintroduction programs of all species fail due to problems with animal behaviour-eg they haven't learnt to hunt, they lack predator cognition, they don't follow park boundaries etc. It appears group species like the wolf are less likely to survive in closer contact with humans than the more parasitic and solitary species such as foxes, coyotes, and also cats. (Once group habits are fractured, group species tend to perish). I like to think the 'spirit of the wild dog', so to speak, 'knows' this (or in Darwinian form-a portion of the gene pool has been selected)-and so lives on within the human group. Maybe the unfairly expelled wolf from the pack lives on today in my lounge room.

Opportunity, adaptability, co-operation, humility, wildness-we have much to learn from them.

In this excellent overview of current research (2003) into the brain, Rita Carter, a medical journalist, certainly has her finger on the pulse (or is that prefrontal cortex?). Although dealing with very difficult concepts, Ms Carter has done an admirable job in simplifying it for the non-brain specialist, like myself. Nevertheless it can still be a challenging read at times.

The book begins by introducing the idea that our experience is not necessarily the same as the external world. The first chapter concerns discussion of "the stream of illusion". Like 'constant vision', our experience of 'constant consciousness' appears to be a merging of projected separate experiences -as in a film. (The quality thereof partly depending on the acting, one of which incidentally, is you). "The construction of our experience depends on merging the consciousness of one moment into the next" (p18). In both our experience of vision and consciousness therefore, some processing selection, by the brain, is implied. There is also a time gap. 1/5 of a second apparently passes between vision received by the brain, and our experience of it (p25). It is similar with our experience of consciousness, ie the 'illusion of immediacy' (p27). It is stated here that we apparently experience our lives (ie consciousness) 1/2 second out of sync with the external world (p29). (If you don't understand how tennis players return serves under this arrangement-don't worry-the brain just projects the real-time (but unconscious) return to us, and then backdates our experience of it, apparently (p29)).

Our tendency to miss things in our visionary field we are not 'primed' for is termed "inattentional blindness", whilst "change blindness", is when one fails to notice any change in their visual field, which can be surprisingly significant. (Sound like someone you know?). Similar 'misses' also apply to consciousness, and therefore also to beliefs etc.

At least 6 main ideas of consciousness are outlined-'property dualism' that mind is an aspect of matter, 'identity'-that mind=matter, 'agnostic'-that consciousness and matter are the one thing but not understood, 'emergence-that mind emerges from physical processes but is not identical to them, 'functionalism'-that mind is a process, and 'Cartesian dualism'-that mind and matter are two different things. Add to this 'panpsychism-everything has a 'spark' of life' or 'mind', elimativism, identity theory (eg Searle), and mysterians-those who believe we just can't figure out what consciousness is because we don't have the equipment to understand it, like a cat just can't do calculus (at least we don't think so)- the list goes on and on, providing endless hyper-activity for many philosophers, which is not altogether a bad thing.

Monism-the idea that consciousness and the observed universe are one, (and send your money to the following address to receive this Holy Oneness...sorry couldn't resist) is opposed to dualism -consciousness and the external world being two different things. Simple, except that The Matrix Has You.

First order and higher order theories of consciousness are discussed, in which 'doubling up' of knowledge is suggested to generate the experience of consciousness-the higher order of 'awareness' essentially being a representation of a representation. (The problem of infinite regress here could be nullified by the brain (?)).

Despite some contrary views, words are not essential for self-monitoring (p36). Einstein once said something like-"most of my thoughts are in concepts, not words". I happen to agree entirely-implying that words are essential for thought seems like ... nonsense to me.

One intriguing concept brought out by recent research is whether something that is emergent can have effects that work *downwards*, a concept sort of new to science. p69-"But if consciousness is something else- the non- physical thing it seems to be, there is no obvious way, given what we know of the material universe, that it can affect a change in the underlying brain state". (I actually disagree).

Other discussions include: consciousness as an emergent brain property, the concept of the quale (experience of eg 'red'), the Chinese Room, the self, 'backrooms of the brain', (eg autistic savants and enhanced special abilities), the delayed maturity of the human prefrontal cortex (making us rather silly as teenagers?), bottom up and top down processing within the brain (similar to how social organisations function), petit mal (temporary unconsciousness), 'free will' and readiness potential (sounds like 'free will battery' to me-p85), spandrels (Mr Gould) and consciousness are also given punctuated adaptive discussion (yours truly), and are we ultimately super egotistical zombies-that is machines which have the contrived vanity to think they are something other than machines? p96-99. I'll let you decide.

And finally, spirituality. Suggested here to be just another brain function (I agree, but a small kernel of doubt remains), despite much emotive appeal to the contrary. And what about formalised (and politicised) spirituality, ie 'religion'? Hardly gets a mention in this book, as it also didn't in Ms Carter's other very good book 'Mapping the Mind'. ('The God Part of the Brain' is a useful read in this field, incidentally). Methinks the neuroscientists are avoiding discussing this topic-too many thorns in that briar patch- evidently. And yet, spirituality and religion IS one of the things the brain consistently does, and this book IS about brain research. (Whether one is for or against 'religion' is not the issue, understanding brain processes behind it can only help to reduce obvious problems associated with it). There is a gaping vacuum here in brain research, I suggest. And we know what nature thinks of vacuums.

Something to think about. I also would have liked to see more evolutionary biology, but otherwise a very good overview.

There is a type of stone which, when polished, refracts more light than other stones. All the world wonders about it.

This is an interesting overview of diamond history and business. It details the history of humankind's fascination with one of the rarest of gems-the carbon tetrahedron. From the jungles of South America, to Canada's arctic north, to the Siberian tundra, to South and Central Africa, to the west coast of Africa, the Australian outback and elsewhere humans have searched for the mother lode-the diamond kimberlite/lamproite pipe-one of the rarest of geological formations, but also one of the richest of treasures-many billions of dollars worth in the richest pipes. And of course, where there is money, there is every breed of deceit, vulgarity and excess. In Africa, (and elsewhere), many have died from civil wars or have been murdered from the lust which seems to spring from this crystal refraction.

The major players are outlined-eg DeBeers, BHP, and a long list of wily rogues and speculators who make and break their fortune on the flippancy of billion year old crustal pressure distribution. The process of diamond formation is described- from the formation of kimberlitic/lamproitic magma deep within the earth, to their eruptive surface craters, which are, incidentally, quite rare in geological time.

Diamond indicators -purple 'G10' garnets, and green diopsides-indicate to geologists where diamonds may be found. Kids played with shiny bright stones, and diamonds could be picked out of the walls of brick farmhouses in 19th century South Africa, before the fantastically rich Kimberly and Premier pipes were found. Mine managers laughed when thousand-carat gems landed on their table, and threw them out the window in disbelief. Millions had also been washed down to the African Atlantic coast, where they are trawled today for considerable profit, the sea washing away the weaker gems and producing a high proportion of better gems. From the diamond mines of South Africa rose Cecil Rhodes, the 3,106 carat Cullinen gem, Ernest Oppenhemier, and De Beers, along with substantial wealth, slavery and a good deal of imperialist oppression. (J. Reader contends in "Africa-biography of a continent", that the strongly segregated capital-labour relations of the gold and gem mines of South Africa formed a precursor to Apartheid).

Grade, shape, size and impurities within diamonds determine their prices, but it is not clear whether the finders always benefit, the money passes up the chain from the worker's mud and slime to the corporate mud and slime, and finally into what most people see-sparkles in shiny glass shop-cases.

Some of the stories related to diamond stealing are worth a mention. In Namibia they would tie diamonds to pigeon feet and accomplaces would retrieve them from bird nests, high in the trees outside a diamond camp. Diamond-laden arrows would be shot over fences, until the time one hit a security truck patrolling the camp. Bodily orifices act like built-in security codes, unless you have the inclination for that kind of investigation. Re-sorted batches would be dispatched slightly lighter than the initial dispatch, since re-sorting is apparently not the same thing as initial sorting, at least not to some accountants, and to some dispatching managers (Australia). Decimal points and the significance of significant figures was lost in some London sorting houses, where mathematical finesse slumbered. Russian entrepenurial dealers enjoyed a game of re-distributing Russian diamond wealth after the breakup of Russian political wealth. Civil wars in recent years have been fought in Africa over shiny stones- where they are, who owns them, who finds them, who sells them and and who owns those who sell them. Coroporate business is fought elsewhere over the same pieces of stone.

It's not all exploitation and corruption of course. Legitimate finds have made people and nations wealthy, particularly in Botswana, Australia and elsewhere. Lustrous gems have long been a symbol for commitment, love, and financial, personal and emotional investment, and have facilitated 'tying the knot', (rightly or wrongly) for millions, since time immemorial.

In the book a quote is given that the entire diamond business rests on two supports-vanity and greed, in which the human race could be relied upon for a steady supply of both. This is not entirely true. There is also love, in which a steady supply, is also assured.

And so the show goes on, but not without purpose or merit. She (or he) might love one more if only one could show her (or him) that refractory sparkle. A piece of glass might also do a similar thing, which too many, to their dismay, have paid good money for.

"The saliva that they leave behind might make you itchy, or if you are really unlucky, you might die".

If you are like me and seem to attract these buzzing beasts you will enjoy this book, although bear in mind it is rather technical and written mainly for the scientifically minded.

Some useful information includes:

-carbon dioxide and heat attracts them, (but it doesn't seem to be explained here why they seem to like some people more than others, or whether it is just that some people react to bites more than others),
-various species attack different parts of the body (eg some the ankles, some the head),
-some don't attack humans at all,
-some attack only humans and monkeys,
-colours vary-some are black and white striped, (these cause yellow fever), others are brown, others dominantly grey.
-the mosquito has had a significant effect on human history through various mosquito borne diseases (eg Dengue, Yellow Fever, Malaria, Encephalitus, and Rift Valley Fever).
-various mosquito-borne diseases are exclusive to birds, some cross from birds to man, some from horses to man, some from monkeys to man, etc.

Some historical plagues and the diseases transmitted by mosquitoes are described eg Dengue, Yellow Fever, Malaria , Encephalitus, and Rift Valley Fever. Historically, it was initially ridiculed that tiny organisms could carry tiny diseases, but careful observation and scientific method eventually won the day over 'folk psychology'. Mosquitoes, through recognition of their association with yellow fever and malaria, played a major part in the development of germ theory, and by association much of modern medicine. Pasteur's germ theory, partially based on work done on mosquitoes as disease carriers, contributed much to humankind's better general health in the latter 19th century in particular. Good sanitation and community health went hand in hand with ongoing scientific research, including that done on mosquito-borne diseases.

Sanitation has been surprisingly effective against mosquito-borne diseases. Limiting stagnant water and widespread use of household netting has been proven to greatly reduce disease rates. The presence of marshes and wetlands increases prevalence, but so does the presence of the longer- lived and more aggressive species (Incidentally, Alaska has amongst the most aggressive mossies of all-which anyone who has been there in the summer will tell you).

A useful read, scientifically astute, but perhaps a little dry, along with most other medical-style texts I have read. Worthwhile.

Estimating unknown resources, particularly in sensitive political climates and in other cultures, is a very precarious exercise.

There are several main weaknesses in the contention by oil expert Mr Deffeyes that world oil production will peak around 2005, and decline somewhat quickly thereafter.

'Hubbert's Peak' refers to a prediction made by a Mr M.K Hubbert in 1956 that peak US oil production would occur in the early 1970s, which turned out to be correct, supposedly dismissed at the time by both government and industry (his historical analysis may be a little rose-coloured here). He has then applied this experience to estimate the timing of peak world oil production. However, the rest of the world is not the US, and the correlation may not be as simplistic as he suggests.

For example, the US is the most drilled oil-producing country in the world, increasing both the chance of discovery and recovery of oil, and also both the maturity and reliability of resource figures. Both the timing and level of exploration is significant here, there were few cultural and environmental restrictions on oil exploration in the US in the first half of the 20 century, and alternative sources were not being investigated. (Some countries simply weren't looking for it). This is one reason I think he has under-estimated ultimately recoverable world oil reserves. It might seem a simple mistake for one quite experienced in the field, but I think such a mistake may be easier to see from one looking at the US experience from the outside.

Most importantly, this book candidly admits to ignoring nearly all large increases in official estimates of oil reserves from OPEC countries announced in the 1980s (p157), assuming they are politically motivated and therefore entirely spurious (eg Iraq's official reserves have sat at a constant 100 billion barrels since the the 1980s, although production has remained high). He dismisses the increases mostly on the basis that there has been little or no exploration to justify them. He doesn't seem to note of course that they were probably well under-estimated in the first place. One could also argue, that since there has been so little exploration, there is much more also to be found. Again, I think his mistake here is essentially cultural-he assumes too many parallels with the US experience.

He also dismisses USGS figures (ie US government estimates) on ultimate recoverable world oil, far too quickly. USGS ultimate recoverable world oil resources are about 1.5 times higher than his figures (p157). Why the discrepancy? One reason is technologically-improved recovery from known oil fields, which he doesn't seem to even mention. Secondly, I personally think that he allows too much personal prejudice of the USGS to colour his thinking. I have done resource analysis for government, (although not in oil, but in metals) and I have repeatedly been surprised at how quickly and easily some people dismiss government estimates, even when I know I had better access to resource figures than they did. Some people occasionally become selective in pointing out past government errors, whilst at the same failing to acknowledge industry errors.

He also has made virtually no concession at all on oil shale, or tar sands, based solely on 20th century experience. He states that oil shale is simply not competitive with the conventional oil price of $US25 barrel (p170), and that seems to be his entire argument. What he fails to even discuss is that with reduced competition from conventional oil, the economics of oil shales changes substantially. Oil shales contain far more oil than all the oil that has so far been produced (one estimate is 242 times conventional oil resources), although not nearly as economically recoverable, true, but his failure to address or properly discuss these resources is telling, especially as regards a potential slow decline after peak oil production.

Although I think there are a number of errors and also some cultural bias in his argument, at the end of the day world oil production WILL peak. In defence of the book, there are some quite interesting side-stories and anecdotes of the oil industry, making it easy to read, with plenty of geological discussion (eg how oil forms, how oil companies explore, major discoveries etc). However, in the light of the above and other similar weaknesses, I would push the peak of oil production out a bit further than his 2004-2008 (say, 2015 or later, but really this is still a guess), based largely on the unknown size of Middle East resources, which he has too easily dismissed. And, as pointed out by other reviewers, for various reasons (eg political, oil shales, undiscovered resources, social, cultural) the subsequent decline is not necessarily going to be as rapid as the rise in production during the 20th century, as even his crudest figures might suggest (eg his Figure on page 136 on coal production in Philadelphia- which shows a haphazard decline due to social reasons).

One final point, I think the book is mistitled- "Hubbert's peak, the impending world oil shortage". I prefer to think positively-"Hubbert's peak, an era of new opportunity for humankind". Bicycles, conservative use of both oil and cars, renewable energies- I'm personally looking forward to it. But I doubt, on even my crude analysis of his figures, that a major decline in world oil production will start to happen for a few decades or more yet. Of course there may well be some social instability in the interim, but this may also be reduced in various ways, *especially if the decline after peak world oil production is gradual*, as many people think. (eg Lomborg's very good book 'the Skeptical Environmentalist' provides a summary of the optimistic viewpoint, although I think he tends to over-estimate world oil reserves).

At any rate, people will adapt, they always have.

This is an entertaining compilation of some famous, and some not-so-famous, movie blunders. Mr Sandys has collected thousands of 'movie mistakes' from a variety of sources, mostly from keen internet users, and with some diligent checking, has lead to this good summary of various movie goofs.

The book is divided into various categories such as the all-time most popular mistakes (as voted on his website), visible crew, things that move that shouldn't (such as the dead), instantly changing weather, and the like. Some gems include wristwatches in 19th century Africa, visible land in the open ocean, actors knocking into doorframes, gas cylinders in ancient Rome, animals which don't care for directors ambitions, kids who cover their ears when a gunshot is coming, and the like. Its amusing, varied, painstakingly compiled and checked, and generally good fun.

Its not meant to be a criticism of various movies, just a lighthearted look at various movie goofs. If you have a DVD you can easily check some of the mistakes listed herein, although in recent years, wise editors have deleted some of the worst mistakes from DVD releases.

I have checked about 100 mistakes that interested me, and I have found that most of the time Mr Sandys and his horde of internet compilers are right, although I have found the odd 'mistake' amongst the listed mistakes, so to speak, at least in my opinion. But never mind about splitting hairs, most of the mistakes listed here are the more obvious and less contentious ones. Movie editors aren't perfect, and neither are mistake spotters!.

Its lighthearted, entertaining, and recommended for movie buffs, not to be taken too seriously. There is a good website also with much more detail, which gets quite a bit of traffic.

This is a very good introductory overview of evolutionary theory, suitable for the enthusiastic novice, the educated skeptic, the qualified biologist, or for those who simply wish to know what has been going on in this fascinating field for the last 150 years and more of scientific enquiry.

The writer, Ernst Mayr, I'm told is a biologist close to 100 years old (bless his soul), and still as sprightly as ever, and has himself been through a good deal of this scientific development, and is therefore in a unique position to approach the subject. Jared Diamond (author of 'The Third Chimpanzee', 'Guns, Germs and Steel') describes the result: "there is no better book on evolution". Whilst a little skeptical of this hyperbole, I decided to check it out, and wasn't disappointed.

Discussions range from the philosphical (everything in this Earth seems to be in a state of flux" p7), to the palaeontological ("the older the strata in which a fossil is found...the more different the fossil will be from living relatives" p13-although see also the occassional stasis of the genotype on p278-79), to the embryonic (eg 'recapitulation'-an important point), to the modern discovery of 'transposable elements' (gene jumping and copying-p100). Important developments in the theory include the 'branching theory' of Darwin (p19), to the theory of common descent (p21), to discussions of biogeography (species distribution), molecular biology (including the molecular clock), to the formation of new genes by doubling and insertion, leading to diversification (p108-9). The reader will find all the scientific development and current investigations exhaustive, but (hopefully!) rarely exhausting.

The causes of speciation have come along way since Darwins 1859 Origin: allopatric,dichopatric, peripactic, sympatric (not found in mammals p180), instantaneous (chromosome doubling), parapatric, and hybridisation. Concepts to ponder over-in case of being caught out at parties.

The historical background of 19th century philosophy is introduced (for which modern day philosophy is a little embarrassed) including 'essentialism' (constant essence of species ie "a natural kind"-with variants either irrelevant or accidental), and 'finalism' (the belief that everything moves toward greater perfection -eg Kant, and others), as compared to Malthus', Wallace's and Darwin's 'population thinking' (the study of variation in populations-a crucial concept).

3 theories of evolution are based on essentialism -transmutationism (origin of new types by mutation or saltation), transformationism-gradual change to a new natural 'type' by the influence of the environment, including use and disuse or inheritance of acquired characters (ie Lamarckism), and orthogenesis-the propensity of the living world to move towards perfection (typified by Kant, amongst others). (There are querks possible in these examples-for example some transmutational theories may be non-essentialist- however these 'higher arguments' are sometimes over semantics as much as over concepts). 'Essentialism' was certainly one of the most significant ideological barriers to evolutionary thought, and still is today. (Some present day philosophers still seem obsessed by it-see 'Darwins Dangerous Idea' by Daniel Dennett for a good discussion of philosophical issues and debate).

Having little time for 'labels' I have never bothered with such labels as 'Darwinism', 'Neo-Darwinism' etc etc, but after reading this book, I found that my position is mostly that of 'Darwinism' anyway. (Some relief, I think, whatever 'Darwinism' may mean).
A good summary of 'Darwinism' is provided (p86):
1) non-constancy of species
2) descent from common ancestor
3) gradualness (but see also below for semantical distinction with punctuationism)
4) diversity (by species multiplication)
5) natural selection (but see also Baldwin Effect below).

These basic tenants have been thrown around and debated for over a century, but it is becoming increasingly obvious that most variants of these ideas amongst evolutionary debates, do not, in fact contradict these basic principles (eg punctuated equilibrium-page 270-"punctuated equilibria, which at first sight, seem to support saltationism and discontinuity, are in fact strictly populational phenomenon, and therefore gradual"). I'm not sure I agree with this point, although I can see the contention is at least partly semantical.

To get some flavour from the book, rather than from me, some veritable gems include:

"sweeping generalisations are rarely correct in evolutionary biology" p271.
"there is no justification in the widespread assumption that consciousness is a unique human property"
p282.
"Selection seems able to to recruit genes in new developmental processes that previously had seemed to have other functions" p113.
"Species are groups of interbredding natural populations that are reproductively isolated from other such groups" p166.
"An organism has to be well adapted as a whole, but it also must be able at all times to cope with its ancestral genome" p154.
"There is alot of structure in the genotype that cannot be discovered and explained by a purely reductionist approach" p145.
"Surely when a population suddenly encounters an extremely adverse situation, the more genetically diverse it is, the greater the chance that it contains genotypes that can better cope with the environmental demands" p105.
"some groups speciate profusely, whereas in others speciation seems to be a rare event" p271.
"most of the variation of genotypes available for natural selection in a population is a result of recombination, not of mutations" p280.
"biological causes and natural selection are dominant in background extinction, whereas physical factors and chance are dominant in mass extinction" p203.
"most new evolutionary lineages arise by budding rather than by splitting" p191.
"rate of speciation is apparently primarily determined by ecological factors" p186.
"Any behaviour that turns out to be of evolutionary significance is likely to be reinforced by the selection of genetic determinants for such behaviour" (eg the Baldwin Effect p137-a very important concept).

And my favourite-"the phenotype of the individual as a whole ..is the actual unit of selection" p126.

One final point -the final discussion of human evolution, and in particular, evolutionary aspects of human behaviour is understandably brief-that is for the present century to unravel!

A wellspring of clean, clear, refreshing information, for the thirsty soul.

The team at the BBC got it right-there is another series of invigorating 'big animal' natural history stories AFTER the dinosaurs went extinct-the radiation and development of the mammals.

This DVD series covers the early expansion of mammals into vacant ecological niches left by the disappearance of (most) of the dinosaurs-from early cat-size horse ancestors, to big carnivourous flightless birds, to giants in the sea (carnivorous whales 18m long), to giants on the plains-eg rhinos trying to be giraffes (up to 6m at the shoulder), elephant ancestors (up to 4m at the shoulder), giant pig-like ancestors, giant carnivorous hoofed animals (Andrewsarchus-about 2m at the shoulder), the sabre tooth cats (smilodon-about 1.2m at the shoulder-bigger than the modern tiger), upright small primates wandering the African plains (australopithecus-about 1.4m at the shoulder), mammoths (about 3m at the shoulder) and eventually a 'big' primate-man (about 1.7m at the shoulder).

There are two DVDs in the set, 1)-the 6 part series, and 2) 2 40 minute-long documentaries, which for those who want deeper analysis, are better than the series. These documentaries take us to the famous fossil site of Messel in Germany, the Sahara desert, Ethiopia, South Africa, and various other locales, with background rationale explained as to various aspects of the series. Most of the stories are indeed based on scientific research-for example the lake beds at the famous fossil site of Messel in Germany appear to have been anoxic-and there is evidence of sudden unusual extinctions which have been surmised to be due to mass releases of carbon dioxide (episode 1). Other examples are leopard teeth marks found in skulls of australopithecus-(episode 4), mammoth kill sites adjacent to ancient cliffs (episode 6), impact injuries in Neanderthal skeletons (episode 6), and exposed fossil mangrove roots in the Sahara desert (episode 2). This sort of background information is essential for a deeper analysis of many of the stories in the main series, and provide good information for the enthusiastic amateur palaeontologist.

This is a wonderful 65 million year story, which has been somewhat neglected during the modern science era, and this series attempts to fill in many gaps for the wonder and scientific endeavour of the chattering and lumbering primates who eventually came down from the trees.

The BBC has left some significant Quaternary and Recent megafaunal extinctions out, in such places as Madagascar, Australia (eg diprotodon, megalania), New Zealand (eg the moa), and other places, so I hope they will visit these places in another series!