The Pandas Thumb: More Reflections in Natural History by Stephen Jay Gould

The Pandas Thumb: More Reflections in Natural History Reviews

• 
  Kuszma

  Úgy vagyok az evolúcióval, hogy hiszem, és alapvetően értem is. De aztán megpróbálom elmagyarázni a gyerekeimnek, és rájövök, hogy nem is annyira értem. Úgyhogy keresek egy könyvet a témában, amit az én szellemi színvonalamra kalibráltak, és ha ennek a könyvnek a címében szerepel a „panda” szó, az mondjuk egy erős érv a kiválasztása mellett. Mert a panda cuki. És most már azt is tudom, hogy miben hasonlít Adyra: neki is hat ujja van. Illetve Ady hatodik ujját a bába eltávolította, a panda viszont megtartotta a magáét. Sőt, direkt azért növesztette, mert kellett neki a bambuszhajtások leszedegetésére, és egyszerűbb volt a csukló szezámcsontjából hatodik ujjat képezni, mint a már meglévő öt ujja egyikét szembe fordítani a többivel. Így lett a pandának hat ujja. (Viszont hogy miért fekete-fehér, azt továbbra sem tudom.)
  
  Stephen Jay Gould esszékötete kiválóan alkalmasnak bizonyult a fenn említett célra. Elképesztően logikusan építi egymásra írásait, sőt, humora is van: amikor a mélytengeri horgászhal hímjével kapcsolatban elkezd a freudi elfojtott vágyakról mélázni, hangosan felkacagtam. Tele van érdekes állatokkal, de ez csak természetes, hisz egy evolúcióról szóló könyv érdekes állatok nélkül olyan, mint a Balaton szabadstrand nélkül. Úgyhogy van itt hiéna, zebra, tyúk fogakkal, meg amit akartok. Fő irányvonala mindazonáltal az, hogy tisztázza a darwinizmussal kapcsolatos elterjedt tévhiteket vagy leegyszerűsítéseket. Következésképpen ha elolvasná az értékelésemet, annál a résznél, hogy a panda „direkt növesztette” a hatodik ujját, tutira rosszallóan cöcögne, mert bizony a leggyakoribb tévképzet az evolúcióval kapcsolatban éppen az, hogy célszerűségre törekszik. Ezzel szemben a valóság az, hogy az evolúció nem törekszik semmire, nincs terve, nem lebeg előtte egy ún. „végső cél”, és pláne nem érdekli a „faj érdeke”. Hanem végtelen számú egyéni variációt kínál fel, amiből aztán a legsikeresebbek több utódot nemzenek, és ez generációk végtelen során keresztül átalakítja a faj képét is. Épp ezért az evolúcióbiológust nem a „tökéletes” érdekli, hanem a különös, az extrém, és az, ami olyan hatást kelt, mint egy sufnituning zsiguli. Tudatosul benne persze, mily tökéletes a sirály szárnyának íve, de azzal sok dolga nincs – inkább leköti a panda hüvelykujja, ami nem is hüvelykujj igazán, sőt, ujjnak is csak félve nevezhetjük, aztán mégis ott fityeg, pedig nem is kéne ott fityegnie.
• 
  Roy Lotz

  Stephen Jay Gould is a pleasure to read. No writer I know can so seamlessly combine the cultural sophistication of belles-lettres with the rigors of scientific explanation. Gould is singularly able to frame scientific controversies and hypotheses within a larger historical context, showing the human side of the scientific endeavor while in no way minimizing its brilliance and legitimacy. Science emerges as both deeply human—colored by a thousand irrational biases and prejudices—and yet remarkably effective at getting beyond these human failings.
  
  I would even go so far to say that Gould is worth reading simply for the writing alone. His prose is excellent—full of personality, and yet never self-indulgent. If you are looking to write non-fiction, you could scarcely find a better model of clarity, wit, and intellectual seriousness.
  
  All this being said, I must admit that there are some irritating aspects to Gould’s writing. Or perhaps I should say to his thinking. Arguably Gould’s favorite topics is how culture and personality can warp the scientific enterprise. He gives excellent examples of this, such as Paul Broca’s controversy over brain size, or the racist theories of John Langdon Down. Gould insists that everyone has cultural biases, and he is surely right. But Gould was no intellectual historian—even if he often dipped into the field—and the way that he wields these supposed biases can be frustrating and superficial.
  
  Perhaps the most irksome example of this is Gould’s preoccupation with gradualism vs. catastrophism—whether things happen bit by bit, or in rapid bursts. Gould styles himself a catastrophist, and is quick to invoke the “Western bias” for gradualism in characterizing his opponents. Yet I think it is inaccurate to call gradualism a “Western bias”: throughout European history, invoking catastrophic events (such as Noah’s flood) as explanations has been extremely common. It is not even quite fair to call gradualism a “bias,” since there are some good arguments for preferring it. In any case, I think that Gould’s labels set up a false dichotomy. Surely there is a continuum between slow and steady and fast and jerky. Besides all this, Gould’s description of some processes as “sudden” or “fast” can be very misleading for the non-scientist, since he is still talking about many thousands of years.
  
  This is just one example of Gould’s penchant for moving scientific questions into the realm of cultural clashes; and I think it is not a fair way to argue. To be fair to Gould, he was a serious scientist and quite capable of making his points on purely empirical grounds. And it is surely legitimate and useful to examine how culture influences science. I mainly object to the way Gould uses this historic truism—that scientists have been guided by biases—to support his own conclusions.
  
  Gould was, of course, a man with his own preoccupations. Aside from the gradualist-catastrophist controversy, he is drawn to stories of scientific racism and sexism, the imperfections of evolution (as in the title essay), the science of allometry (the study of size), and the relationship of phylogeny to ontogeny. This may seem like quite a wide field—and Gould was a man of eclectic interests—but his essays have a family resemblance: they examine how biases have distorted the truth of evolution. Of course, what constitutes the "truth of evolution" is open to debate, and Gould has quite particular notions in this field.
  
  Some of Gould’s pet theories have not gained general acceptance in the intervening time. But considering how much this field has evolved in the last forty years, it is remarkable that these essays have aged so well. They can still be profitably read by the curious amateur. And, as I said at the beginning, even if the information in these essays were entirely obsolete, the essays would still be worth reading for the quality of writing alone. Few science writers have gained this distinction.
• 
  Cassandra Kay Silva

  Having recently settled in Australia I found the information on Marsupials in South America highly interesting. I also enjoyed his somewhat internal debates about dinosaurs. I still haven't latched on to his writing as much as I would have liked. The content is really good and he has a great sum up near the end about a lot of "points" other science writers have made that really comes through with some fervor about the way that bats and bees see and what the world is to us. The sexual and racial issues surrounding Evolution in scientific history is a subject I detest but he still was able to keep me interested during that portion as well. Its not a book I would re read but it was a good once over.
• 
  Pam Baddeley

  Second of Gould's collected essays, as before this collection covers a wide range of subjects in the field of evolution, palaeontology etc. including examinations of the racist and sexist bias in the history of the field and even considering the subject of neoteny (retention of features of the embryo to which humans owe much of their adaptability, upright posture etc) from the point of view of Disney's animation of Mickey Mouse (who got progressively younger as the cuteness=baby features aspect was latched onto). An essay dealing with the Piltdown Man hoax and the possibility of Teilhard de Chardin's possible involvement as a co-hoaxer was interesting.
  
  One point is that an essay on the historical treatment of Down's Syndrome, exposing the racist assumptions behind its classification (Down distinguished various categories of mentally disabled people according to theories of racial types and relative evolution of such types in the kind of specious classification typically used in the nineteenth century, hence the outmoded term 'mongolism') does use terms for such disabilities that today would be unacceptable.
  
  It's not possible to tell how any of these essays have been superseded by later scholarship - he does refer at one point to the just then opening up possibilities of DNA sequencing. A few of the essays come over as a bit 'dry' and I did take a couple of days out to read a novel as a change of pace. So for all those reasons, I would rate it at 3 stars.
• 
  Maitrey

  This was a hugely enjoyable book by an extremely talented writer. The thought most running across my mind when I was reading this book was: "Where can I get more Stephen Jay Gould books?!"
  
  Since it is a collection of essays, I don't really want to review any of them personally. Sure, some of the science here is 30 years old (Gould was always sharp on the uptake though), some of it is out of favour (say Gould's ideas on the gene-centric view of evolution), but you'll still enjoy reading every bit of it. There are ideas about the evolution of dinosaurs, magnetic bacteria, South American marsupials and even Mickey Mouse. Themes such as racism and sexism, as ever, continue to play a major role in his examination of the past.
  
  What was most enjoyable was the fact that Gould is such a sympathetic writer, yet his work is full of wit and consideration. The Panda's Thumb made for an excellent book to pick up, regardless of what I was doing or what my mood was and immediately get lost in whatever world Stephen Jay Gould transported you to.
• 
  Jim

  This wonderful book is a collection of 31 short articles that appeared in the magazine "Natural History" in the late 1970's ('77-'79)...each 'chapter' is an independent read (for the most part) that, if you are a patient pooper, can be finished in a single seating.
  The topics range from discussions about Darwin's "Origin of Species" to Agassiz unenlightened racism to the length of a year 500 million years ago to Mickey Mouse's head size. Gould is a great writer with full command of natural history and a knack in making a difficult subject both informative and entertaining.
  The only reason that I 'dinged' the rating is that some of the articles...those involving paleontology and general geology...are very much dated and out of step with the current thinking of earth's history. I know that that is somewhat unfair, but, hey, this review is intended for those potential readers who might assume that the science presented represents the cutting edge some aspects of the earth sciences. It does not. There have been huge advances in both discoveries (e.g. feathered dinosaurs) and evolutionary philosophy...there is no way SJG could have predicted all of that.
  The book is highly entertaining...I recommend it!
• 
  Sabrina Spiher

  "An early collection of Stephen Jay Gould's essays from his column in Natural History magazine, The Panda's Thumb was an enjoyable read, assuming you like natural history. It's the third of Gould's collections I've read, and the earliest I've read as well, but it held up well over time. Composed in the late '70s -- '78 and '79, I believe -- the essays in The Panda's Thumb bear the mark of Gould's charming, articulate style ..."
  
  Read the rest of my review at [
  http://www.sabrinaspiher.com/forums/v...]
• 
  Conjun

  Podría ser, fácilmente, la mejor lectura "por casualidad" con la que me haya topado en años. Y de lejos.
  
  No venía de recomendaciones previas de amigos, colegas comunicadores o críticas del libro. Andaba, de hecho, buscando otro de Stephen Jay Gould, de quien he oído mucho pero a quien no había leído antes (concretamente "Wonderful Life: The Burgess Shale and the Nature of History"), y al no encontrarlo, este se cruzó en mi camino en la biblioteca. Divulgación, biología, artículos breves, en español y un autor que me despertaba curiosidad. Buen cambio respecto de otras lecturas de divulgación recientes y prometedor. Y vaya si cumple.
  
  La prosa de Gould es amena y didáctica, no toca temas excesivamente complicados de comprender en ningún momento, y sabe hacer muy asequibles todos los detalles incluso para quien sepa cero y menos de la disciplina de la que habla. El estilo periodístico, no académico, hace mucho en su favor, pero el hecho de que sea una colección de artículos de columnas que publicaba desde los años 70 no perjudica a la cohesión del libro. La edición divide las 350 páginas de artículos (las 30 últimas son bibliografía e índice de conceptos: algo que no siempre incluyen los libros de divulgación, pero que siempre deberían incluir) en ocho secciones temáticas, la mayoría de cuatro artículos, alguna de tres o cinco, que le dan un nexo de unidad a todo. Y, de paso, aunque a mí no me haya sucedido, facilitan la lectura a quien se le pueda atragantar alguno de los temas, al durar pocas páginas y cambiar a otros. Además, vemos en sus páginas un reconocimiento cultural amplio de su público, tanto el que siente curiosidad por la evolución de Mickey Mouse, como el que va a apreciar referencias a Toscanini, lo que hace que sientas mucho más cercana la voz que habla.
  
  Sin embargo, la amenidad de la divulgación no me parece el mayor valor de "El pulgar del panda", sino la enorme conciencia social que demuestra Gould. Constantemente entra a debatir y condenar cuestiones de racismo científico o de machismo en el mundo académico e investigador, y no tiene reparos, si lo cree conveniente, en hacer ver su rechazo del liberalismo económico o en citar un par de veces a Marx (a uno le gusta lo que le gusta, qué se le va a hacer). Y, al mismo tiempo, urge al lector a no olvidar el contexto del que vienen las cosas y la necesidad de analizar todo objetivamente: sí, el doctor Down era un racista empedernido que relacionaba la raza mongola con baja inteligencia, pero solo era una voz más de una época en que eso se consideraba buena praxis; y sí, Lysenko cometió muchísimas barbaridades para imponer su visión, pero no era esta algo absurdo que iba contra un consenso darwinista, sino una teoría alternativa de enorme aceptación y perfecta plausibilidad en la época en que se plantea.
  
  Todo el conjunto de detalles hacen que sea esta una deliciosa obra de divulgación. La recomendaría a cualquiera, lea o no habitualmente literatura científica. Es de esas lecturas que ayudan a recordar y demostrar a la gente que la ciencia es bella, divertida y, al cabo, fascinante.
• 
  Adrian Colesberry

  The greatest modern voice for the neo-Darwinian synthesis. He and a colleague, whose name I forget, re-purposed Kipling's term "just-so stories" to describe evolutionarily plausible but unprovable explanations for things. An amazing critical thinker, Gould realized that if you didn't establish some way of critiquing evolutionary explanations, they would become the equivalent of folk explanations, overpredicting to the point that they could never be disproven. Once evolutionary explanations became non-disprovable, it stops being a science and starts being a belief, like believing in god. So he spent a lifetime not just doing his own research but in popularizing disciplined neo-Darwinian critical thinking in this series of essays in Natural History magazine or Nature magazine, I forget. Most of my understanding of the neo-Darwinian synthesis comes from reading Gould.
• 
  Fabianna Himet

  3.5
  The book consists of 31 essays divided into 8 sections, published in conjunction in 1981. Gould has a curious way of writing. Throughout, he goes over different themes relating them to principles of evolution. He presents information about particularities in natural history with philosophical inquiry.
  
  In the first section, Perfection, and Imperfection: a trilogy on a Panda’s Thumb, he talks about contrivance, a term coined by Darwin, which basically refers to existing features that produce innovative functions other than previously defined (enter artificial selection’s realm). An idea that breaks from the notion that new parts arise to form a sole assigned function. On this note, he elaborates on pandas’ six digits (”fingers”) and how it was believed (as stated in The Giant Panda: a morphological study of evolutionary mechanisms of D. D. Davis, 1964) that it was an extension of the sesamoid bone that looked like a thumb. He further expands on contrivances in Senseless Signs of History, remarking that it should be acknowledged as evidence of evolution that doesn’t fall within the natural selection concept. The imperfections' seen as remnants of structures that served some function for previous species but no longer shared that function with the current organism. An example used was whales' hip bones. In Double Trouble, Gould explores a clam species with a modified mantle that permits it to camouflages as fish.
  
  The second section comprises: Natural Selection and the Human Brain, Darwin’s Middle Road, Death before Birth, Shades of Lamarck y Caring Groups, and Selfish Genes. He revises Alfred Russell Wallace's posture on evolution in contrast to Darwin’s, questioning the exclusivity of natural selection as the agent of evolutionary change. Wallace attributed all evolutionary changes to natural selection and strictly sustained that natural selection would result in an improved version of the species (extreme Darwinism, anyone?). Darwin wouldn’t consider himself part of the ‘Darwinism’ wave that resulted from misapplications of his work because he recognized that other factors and evolutionary mechanisms also contribute (but don’t believe me and look over it yourself in Origin of Species). If you’re too lazy—because the book isn’t exactly thriller—the recap is that natural selection is a solid evolutionary force, but it still isn’t the only one (there’re nonadaptive mechanisms for ex). Wallace never accepted the validity of nonadaptive mechanisms. These nonadaptive mechanisms offered correlations between species development and the existence of organs that had a specific function (selective) but could execute other functions (nonselective).
  
  He goes over predominant ideas on evolution at the time, science from a cultural level of analysis, evidence of evolution principles, and science’s unorthodox limits. In A Biological Homage to Mickey Mouse, Gould argues that the seemingly nonchalant changes of Mickey’s physical appearance were deliberate. The animation is altered to appear more childlike (enlarged head and eyes) in order to provoke a favorable public reception by “activating the nurturer inside us.” His last section, Size and Time, includes Our Allotted Lifetimes, Natural Attraction: Bacteria, The Birds and The Bees y Time’s Vastness.
  
  I think Gould’s posture on evolution is clear throughout. That nature works with what it has and utilizes it to its advantage creating new functions for it. That an organism doesn’t only develop structures to respond to a precise situation by means of natural selection, but that existing systems progress and change because their function isn’t of use anymore.
  This is what I understood but read it yourself as I could be terribly off, still fun!
• 
  Jason Adams

  Stephen Gould has a remarkable ability to cover scientific concepts in an accessible manor without dumbing things down. The format of his "Reflections..." produces bite-sized meditations on evolution and natural history topics. My only concern is with the constant movement of science, that insights of the seventies may be stale in the current thinking. I wonder at times if I am reading a time capsule of a particular mode of thought, or the dawn of the accepted way of thinking.
  
  Things I thought were interesting:
  1) The terms Idiot, Moron, and Mongoloid once had Scientific Relevance. Gould had to write an essay advocating the use of Downs' Syndrome over the still accepted Mongoloid Idiot.
  2) The idea that Birds should be reclassified under a Family of Dinosaurs captures my imagination. Since it's been forty years, I wonder where that ended up.
  3) Finally, the way Gould captures the impact of size as an environment for adaptation breaks up most of the science fiction tropes of big vs. little ("The Fly," "The Fantastic Voyage") while opening whole new doors in understanding of nature.
• 
  Joni Baboci

  The Panda's Thumb is an overall interesting book dealing with the curiosities of evolution through a compendium of articles written by Gould mostly in the 70s for Nature magazine. The 1992 edition even goes over some clarifications which have come into light in the two decades since the articles have been published.
  
  I think the book is a fairly readable popular natural sciences book, although the fragmentation that comes from it being an anthology of articles does make it seem aimless at times. I think the genre has advanced in terms of content and readability by leaps and bounds in the last two decades and while Gould is still a good read, I do believe there are lots of equally good books available which have a bit more structure than the Panda's Thumb. As for anthologies I am a big fan of The Best American Science and Nature Writing yearly series.
• 
  Sara Ⓥ

  Con una prosa estremamente brillante Gould ci accompagna attraverso i grandi temi dell'evoluzione e ci dimostra come la natura, secondo le parole del biologo Francois Jacob, "non è un divino artefice ma un eccellente bricoleur". Dal pollice del panda appunto, ai dinosauri, e passando anche attraverso le evoluzioni fumettistiche di Topolino, Gould ci spiega in modo chiaro e coinvolgente perché sono le più curiose imperfezioni della natura a fornire la prova del carattere casuale dell’evoluzione. Una lettura appassionante anche per chi come me non è affatto un esperto in biologia o paleontologia.
• 
  Jessica Blevins

  This book, read as prep for AP biology before my senior year in high school, brought me into the world of biology in high school, and inspired me to major in biology in college. It also inspired me to read more nonfiction, particularly science nonfiction. It's been one of my favorite types of writing ever since. Steven Gould is amazing at bringing technical concepts into layman's terms.
• 
  Enrique Oviedo

  Gould escribe con un estilo muy ameno y didáctico. El libro se me ha pasado en un suspiro.
  Como toda recopilación, tiene sus altibajos y el yuxtaponer ensayos con temática similar hace que en momentos se repitan frases casi idénticas en capítulos próximos.
  Sin duda, lo más interesante son los capítulos donde se expone su teoría del puntualismo sobre el ritmo de evolución de las especies. También me han parecido notables los dedicados a la figura de Darwin.
  El hecho de que el libro tenga cerca de 40 años te hace cerrarlo con la extraña sensación de no saber si algunas de las teorías que se acaban de leer siguen vigentes o han sido refutadas.
• 
  Tim Robinson

  A collection of essays is not an easy kind of book to like.
  
  Here we have a common theme - a slightly unorthodox view of evolution - but no overarching structure or narrative. Nor does each essay come to a single specific conclusion. So it is a largely random wandering through the author's mind, with neither "schedule" nor "map".
  
  A greater effort to tie the essays together and sharpen their conclusions would have made this book a lot more readable.
• 
  Ravioli

  I'm sorry. I've been trying to read this book for 2 years. The essay topics are interesting, and I think Gould tries to make it accessible, but I just couldn't make it through. The content was over my head and the writing wasn't interesting enough to keep me hooked. DNF 56%ish
• 
  Jimmy

  I'm rereading all of Stephen Jay Gould's works. They are well worth it for pure scientific entertainment. The Panda's Thumb was written in 1980, so it is a bit old. Yet it still stands up well.
  
  The pands has five digits plus a "thumb" that is not really a thumb at all. It does show how a thumb could form since there is no gene for a thumb.
  
  Gould argues against the slow change theory of evolution. Rather he argues for dramatic sudden changes. I believe Dawkins and others still continue this argument.
  
  I was fascinated by the magnetotactic bacterium. They build a magnet in their bodies made of tiny particles.
• 
  Paul

  OK, my favorite part?
  Where Gould explains the evolution of Disney's Mickey Mouse and how Mickey seems to be the original "Benjamin Button" de-aging thru the decades. And Goofy is probably the only real "adult" in the entire cartoon gang. Poor Goofy, I'd never thought of him as being either a widower or a divorcee or maybe even a single parent before reading this book.
  By the way, Pandas don't actually have thumbs, they have, ahhhh, but I'll let you go read the book and find out for youselves :-)
• 
  James F

  Gould's second collection of articles from Natural History. Like the first, very interesting and fun to read, if now somewhat dated. I think that in some of the articles, he tries a little too hard to be a "gadfly" and generalizes his conclusions too much, but he always provokes thought. I enjoy reading articles on evolutionary theory that don't get bogged down in arguing with creationists, but take the facts for granted and discuss the more interesting questions of How and Why things happened the way they did.
• 
  Jimbot

  This is the book you want to have just read when you are faced with having to argue with an idiot. Unfortunately, you can never win an argument with an idiot, but at least there is a chapter describing the differences between idiot, moron, and imbecile. When it comes time to explain to your argument-partner what all that fuss regarding Darwin was all about, the topics in this book will handily give you something to knowingly speak about.
• 
  Valerie

  This man's wit and intelligence and his interest in everything were much to be admired.
• 
  Yolanda Alcarraz

  Un excelente libro de divulgación científica. Stephen Jay Gould, como historiador de la ciencia, nos cuenta sobre las discusiones que se han planteado y se plantean de diferentes teorías científicas mencionando varios autores como Charles Darwin, Thomas H. Huxley, Richard Dawkins, Niles Eldredge y entre otros grandes (y no tan grandes) hombres dedicados a la ciencia. Plantea estas teorías aceptando y refutando cada una de ellas ¡Es una pelea entre teorías! El autor analiza nuestro pasado descubriendo grandes interrogantes y donde el fruto de la investigación ha generado un elixir de respuestas correctas, aunque muchas otras han sido toxicas e incluso bochornosas.
  
  La forma que tiene de narrar los descubrimientos y teorías de la ciencia, enlazándolos con sucesos actuales, con literatura, arte e incluso dibujos animados. Todo puede formar parte de la ciencia.
  
  Te hace pensar entre las diferentes posibilidades y analizar como son y planteando nuevas a la vista, lo cual está llevando a los científicos por el camino correcto, con altas y bajas, para entender al ser humano, a todo ser e individuo, a los ecosistemas y al mundo.
• 
  Arturo

  Maravilloso. Uno de los mejores libro de divulgación científica que se haya escrito jamás. Charles Darwin (1809-1882) es considerado hasta el día de hoy como uno de los científicos más importantes en la historia de la humanidad, y su libro “El origen de las especies” más que un clásico de la literatura es sin lugar a duda una obra maestra. Desde Darwin la evolución ha sido la base de toda la biología moderna, como Theodosius Dobzhansky (1900-1975) expresó en su célebre frase “Nada en biología tiene sentido si no es a la luz de la evolución”. Pero ¿cómo pudo Darwin desarrollar una teoría tan importante? ¿Acaso fue un genio sin precedentes? ¿O tan solo un paciente recolector de información? El pulgar del Panda responde a estos y otros cuestionamientos, además contiene muchos ensayos interesantísimos sobre la biología.
• 
  pablo

  Ensayos sobre ecología, evolución y biología. Bonitos aunque se sienten un poco viejos (el libro es, creo, de los 80s).
  En particular me caló un ensayo que mostraba que en la Isla Mauricio, único habitat del pájaro dodo (extinto hace más de 300 años) ha empezado a desaparecer una especie de árboles. La razón se desconocía, y germinar las semillas resultaba imposible en medios artificiales. Sin embargo, se encontró que al darle las semillas a pavos, estos las digerían, liberaban y germinaron semillas, mostrando la cercana conexión evolutiva del dodo y el árbol, y lo delicado del balance ecológico.
  Es un libro reflexivo y llevadero, pero un poco viejo, en una rama que ha evolucionado (pun intended) mucho en los últimos 30 años.
• 
  Lupo

  La prima parte del libro mi è piaciuta molto. E quella che riguarda più specificatamente l'evoluzione. La parte che racconta specifiche storie relative a particolari specie mi ha interessato poco.
  Molto chiara la parte dell'evoluzione, contiene anche note sul dibattito tra Gould e Dawkins, che ha influenzato la storia delle teorie evoluzionistiche degli ultimi quarant'anni, e ancora continua (anche se Gould non c'è più). I saggi sono stati scritti nel '78 e '79 e in alcuni si vedono le rughe, ma la testimonianza intellettuale è di primissimo livello.
  
• 
  João

  The Panda's thumb is one of the most widely read and translated SJ Gould books. It took me a few years to finally read it all as I've read multiple chapters in random order before (those about the thumb of the panda, the one about solving the Piltdown conspiracy, among others). Finally finishing it I must say it is a bit less cohesive then the previous one but has some texts that shine even more on their own. My favourite piece on science history was the "Crazy Old Randolph Kirkpatrick" chapter. Highly recommended!
• 
  Clàudia

  It's a well written and exciting book on curiosities in natural sciences and evolution. It must be probably the "scientific" book I mainly enjoyed reading. However, some essays are pretty old (from the 1980s approximately), so some facts may be outdated. What I liked the most about Stephen Jay Gould is that he is aware of the impact of human biases on science, and most of his essays reflect so. He knows that the work behind science production is not neutral, and the impact that history and politics have had on science is visible.