Å·±¦ÓéÀÖ

This book was not at all what I thought it would be. I totally understand and support the science behind what Wilson says. What bothered me was the way in which he says it.

The book purports to be a call for unity, for "bi-partisanship," if you will, between Scientists and Religious Leaders. Wilson even addresses the beginning (and sometimes the end, and sometimes the middle) of each chapter to a nameless Pastor. Things start out well: Wilson suggests that they each put aside their thoughts on how the world was formed and how Man got to be the dominant lifeform (the roots of partisanship on this issue) and instead work together to preserve The Creation, this wondrous world around us that is falling prey to ever-increasing species extinction and habitat loss.

Unfortunately, within the first few pages, Wilson goes out of his way to basically tell the Pastor that while he has agreed to disagree on the Origins of Life, the Pastor and his followers are wrong.

I can easily see the audience for whom this book is intended -- those on the religious (especially fundamentalist Christian) side of the divide -- failing to make it past the first chapter as it becomes obvious that Wilson is not interested in agreeing to disagree in order to build a coalition to change policy and save the Earth -- what he wants is for the Religious to agree that his facts are right, their beliefs are wrong, and therefore they must come over to his side of thinking.

I may be in the minority here, but I really do think it is possible to have a respect for the earth, to wish to turn the tide of species extinction and global warming, to be good stewards, and to still be devoutly religious. And I think Wilson hurts only his own ultimate cause by not allowing for that concept.

For the record, I am not one of those devout persons who believes the Earth was truly made in 7 24-hour periods, nor do I believe that the End Days are upon us. And perhaps the people I assume would be offended (by being offered an olive branch that is quickly pulled back and used as a bludgeon, by being called stupid and then asked to do their fair share) will not be, and so I'm the one guilty of condescension. But that tone that I perceived was what put me off the book and made it so difficult to finish -- I truly had nights where I felt I'd been reading for hours, only to discover that I'd really read two pages and only 20 minutes had gone by.