I always forget about open threads! Anyone read any good books over the summer? Bad ones to avoid? I’ll have a review of The Tenth Parallel up soon, but after reading it, and several other books…I’m beginning to think that for most Americans they should stick to American history if they want to read history. Unless they read high school level books. Shorter works are really hard to get much out of unless you have a thicker interpretative framework. So many times I catch myself thinking, “Ah, makes sense, I read in X the context behind this fact.” Or, “That’s a biased reading, I know that it doesn’t comport with the field’s consensus orthodoxy, which the author isn’t noting for readers….” Next in my list is The Invisible Gorilla: And Other Ways Our Intuitions Deceive Us, but first I need to finally finish The Troubled Empire: China in the Yuan and Ming Dynasties. Also looking forward to Eureka Man: The Life and Legacy of Archimedes.
Razib Khan’s degrees are in biochemistry and biology. He has blogged about genetics since 2002, previously worked in software development, is an Unz Foundation Junior Fellow and lives in the western US. He loves habaneros.
August 30th, 2010 at 2:07 pm
I’ve just read “Opening Skinner’s Box; Great Psychological Experiments of the Twentieth Century” by Lauren Skinner. It doesn’t touch on stuff like IQ or the Five Personality Traits, but does include Milgram’s experiment on obedience, Loftus’s experiment on false memory, and eight other examples. She’s not the brightest button, our author, but she’s perky, enterprising and energetic and, in the end, I found her writing pretty engaging. She did persuade me that there ‘s a huge gap between what psychologists study and what one might wish, in the abstract, that they would study.
August 30th, 2010 at 2:41 pm
[...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by Geoffrey Dyson, World Amazing Things. World Amazing Things said: Open Thread – August 30th, 2010 | Gene Expression: I always forget about open threads! Anyone read any good books … http://bit.ly/aWn6r6 [...]
August 30th, 2010 at 2:43 pm
I just started reading “Food of the Gods: The Search for the Original Tree of Knowledge – A Radical History of Plants, Drugs, and Human Evolution” by Terence McKenna. I haven’t finished it because I don’t read much, but the concept is fascinating.
August 30th, 2010 at 4:57 pm
I just read “Ice Age peoples of North America” edited By Polson Bonnichsen and Karen Turnmire. It covers what would seem to be the second biggest controversy in archeology, when exactly did people first get to the Americas. The Clovis first or the late entry model school got off to a big early lead and but it looks like the early entry model school has passed them by as of late. The largest controversy was the decades long skirmish between the we are all out of Africa faction versus the multi-regionalists which the readers here at GNXP got not only got front row seats to not long ago but witnessed an extra inning win by the home team (Atta boy Cochran!) thanks to the proof provided by the Neaderthal DNA. This book strongly implies, that the Clovis first model is dying a slow death by the slow but steady accumulation of evidence that people have been in the Americas long before the Clovis culture. I’ve blundered before here offering up opinions to an audience that knows ten times as much as I do, so learning from past mistakes I ask a question rather than state an opinion, where does acedemia now stand in this controversy of America’s first people.
It reminds of a quote by that old lovable war criminal Henry Kissinger
“In acedemia the fights are so vicious because the stakes are so small.”
August 30th, 2010 at 7:12 pm
Oh! I’ll have to read “Ice Age peoples of North America”. Thanks!
On the topic of Native Americans, the best book I have ever read on this topic is “Ishi in Two Worlds” by Theodora Kroeber.
I love the book “The Book Nobody Read: Chasing the Revolutions of Nicholaus Copernicus” by Owen Gingerich. Intense and enthralling.
Also, “Byzantium: The Bridge from Antiquity to the Middle Ages” by Michael Angold. While it drags at points, you’ll finally understand the meaning of the word iconoclast!
Oh, and “The Places in Between” by Rory Stewart about his “walk” across Afghanistan in 2002.
August 31st, 2010 at 1:48 am
Marnie, did you know that Rory Stewart is now a Member of Parliament? Did his book give any sign that he might be good at that? Or too good for that?
August 31st, 2010 at 5:02 am
I think Andrew Gelman is responsible for much of my summer reading. When it is not this Blog. I read Tomasello’s ‘why we cooperate’, which I think is from here, and which was quite enjoyable. (Made me muse about pointing, and teaching kids not to…, among other things). Paul Blooms How Pleasure works, and Sheena Iyengar The art of choosing, which I think is due to andrew. A whole bunch of things on the economic blow-up (mainly as sound books): Michael Lewis, the Big Short, Scott Patterson, The quants; Sorkin’s Too big to fail. cohen’s House of Cards. An edited volume on Evolutionary Social Psychology (No Hauser, but a chapter by Haidt on morality).
August 31st, 2010 at 5:39 am
Aha, I see that the gullible chap who covers Climate Science for the Telegraph is lauding scepticism in the context of Marc Hauser. Physician heal thyself!
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/7972604/Marc-Hauser-monkeying-with-the-truth.html
August 31st, 2010 at 9:28 am
“Did Rory Stewart’s book give any sign that he might be good as a politician?”
In some ways, yes. He is an extraordinary judge of character with a great sense of humor.
Perhaps too good for politics, but his mother, I’m sure, is much relieved. (He promised his mother that after the Afghanistan trip, no more danger in the Middle East.)
August 31st, 2010 at 1:53 pm
“Professor Frank Garland, and his brother, Cedric, recommend that every cancer patient should have their vitamin D tested and brought up to a high normal range. This is the natural high level that is found in people who live an outdoor life in sunny countries and can be achieved by taking 50,000 units of vitamin D per week for eight to twelve weeks followed by maintenance on 1,000 to 2,000 units a day”.
ACCORDING to research from the newly published study by Cedric F. Garland, Dr. P.H., FACE, Department of Family and Preventive Medicine and Moores Cancer Center of the University of California, San Diego (UCSD), “It is projected that raising the minimum year-around serum 25(OH)D level to 40-60 ng/ml (100-150 nmol/L) would prevent approximately 58,000 new cases of breast cancer and 49,000 new cases of colorectal cancer each year, and three quarters of deaths from these diseases, in the US and Canada.”
Plasma vitamin D and mortality in older men: a community-based prospective cohort study.
“There was a U-shaped association between vitamin D concentrations and total mortality. An approximately 50% higher total mortality rate was observed among men in the lowest 10% (<46 nmol/L) and the highest 5% (>98 nmol/L [or 39 ng/ml]) of plasma 25(OH)D concentrations compared with intermediate concentrations. Both high and low concentrations of plasma 25(OH)D are associated with elevated risks of overall and cancer mortality.
Frank Garland, 1950-2010
“”A UCSD professor whose studies shed light on the link between vitamin D and cancer. He died Aug. 17 in La Jolla after a year-long battle with an undisclosed illness“
August 31st, 2010 at 2:52 pm
A spellbinding saga on a truly epic scale that brings to life Brazil and her history.
Through the lives of two powerful families, Brazil depicts five turbulent centuries in the history of a remarkable land. From colony to kingdom, from empire to nation, Brazil is filled with memorable people living through one of the great adventures in human history.
The Cavalcantis are among the original settlers and establish the classic Brazilian plantation — vast, powerful, built with slave labor. The da Silvas represent the second element in both contemporary and historical Brazil: pathfinders and prospectors. For generations, these adventurers have set their eyes on El Dorado, which they ultimately find in a coffee fortune at Sao Paulo.
Brazil is an intensely human story, brutal and violent, tender and passionate. Perilous explorations through the Brazilian wilderness . . . the perpetual clash of pioneer and native, visionary and fortune hunter, master and slave, zealot and exploiter . . . the thunder of war on land and sea as European powers and South American nations pursue their territorial conquests… the triumphs and tragedies of a people who built a nation covering half the South American continent, all are here in one spell-binding saga.
http://www.erroluys.com/BrazilPage1.htm
August 31st, 2010 at 9:31 pm
Thanks for the “Brazil” suggestion.
September 1st, 2010 at 12:13 am
Razib, reading books is certainly great, but what I’d like to know is, when are you finally going to sit down and actually write one?
September 1st, 2010 at 12:33 am
topics?
September 1st, 2010 at 5:14 am
I’m beginning to think that for most Americans they should stick to American history if they want to read history
Well, to some extent history = the politics of the past. Politics are notoriously given to deception and wishful thinking, and history even more so, seeing that the objects can’t answer back. But I disagree – these blinders exist for American history as well, and besides, Americans can benefit from knowing more about the world around them.
This summer hasn’t been very productive for me reading-wise, I did read ‘Empires of the Silk Road’ (which was discussed here at length) and didn’t like it – there seemed to be too full of wild conjectures and central asian chauvinism; though I admit that I didn’t delve into the lengthy footnotes.
I also read “Byzantium: The Surprising Life of a Medieval Empire” by Judith Herrin – I don’t know how it compares with other introductory books about Byzantium but I quite liked it. There was lots of interesting social history that was sorely missing in Beckwith’s book.
September 1st, 2010 at 9:11 am
toto is right Razib, you do need to write a book. As to a topic it will be one you self discover, some area within the science/history overlap that fascinates you and is begging for a book that fills in what is now a gap. Then you will start to neglect blogging because that one will lead to another and then another.
September 1st, 2010 at 5:49 pm
I have a question that I’d like the smart people who read this blog (yes, that’s you!) to tackle.
In boxing, there’s a truism that white boxers “cut” more easily than black boxers. That is, white skin cuts more easily than black skin. A white boxer whose defensive skills are the same as a black boxer will cut more easily, with the same wear and tear on the face.
This sounds like complete nonsense to me. I just think that for the last oh, couple of generations, the boxing biz has been mostly black (with a recent shift towards Latinos), and that the whites who gravitated to boxing didn’t have good defensive skills, but I am willing to be convinced otherwise.
I think that IF its true, the greater amount of eumelanin in black skin confers a greater amount of elasticity….
September 2nd, 2010 at 8:14 am
It is a fact that Africans have thicker skin not just darker skin. ( I have seen a quote from a black woman that ” white men give me the creeps – their skin is like paper”). A secondary reason is boxers cut around the orbits and whites have sharper angles on these bones.
.
September 2nd, 2010 at 4:24 pm
“A secondary reason is boxers cut around the orbits and whites have sharper angles on these bones. ”
I’ve heard that. Of course, Muhammad Ali was rather sharp-featured.
But thanks – I’ll look into this further – if you have any links which substantiate this I’d appreciate it.
September 2nd, 2010 at 4:32 pm
PS
This says no difference in white & black women:
http://grande.nal.usda.gov/ibids/index.php?mode2=detail&origin=ibids_references&therow=356697
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/1138283
“Height and race do not have a statistically significant bearing on skin thickness values.”
This link sez same thickness but blacks have MORE layers:
http://www.netwellness.org/question.cfm/31729.htm
“Briefly, the stratum corneum, or the outer most layer of the skin of blacks has been shown to be made up of more layers when compared with that of whites. The overall thickness of this layer in white and black skin is generally similar, however in black skin it seems to be more compact, accounting for the greater number of layers.”
Same thickness, more layers – more elasticity – or….
More layers = less prone to cutting?
And this…
OK, not a scientific site but ….
http://www.whiterskin.info/black-skin-white-skin-asian-skin-whats-the-difference/
says black skin has more fibroblasts.
On fibroblasts:
http://www.umm.edu/dermatology-info/anatomy.htm
“The dermis is held together by a protein called collagen, made by fibroblasts (skin cells that give the skin its strength and resilience). This layer also contains pain and touch receptors.”
Hm.
Folk wisdom proves its utility.
September 2nd, 2010 at 8:25 pm
I added an addendum but it was spammed – essentially yes, it appears that black skin has more layers and more fibroblasts, making it tougher. It’s not thicker but is tougher. I’m too lazy to look up the links that got lost.
September 3rd, 2010 at 9:14 am
If it has extra layers how can it be thinner eh ?
Ali was only cut once in his entire professional career – against Bob Foster
Henry Cooper
September 3rd, 2010 at 9:50 am
Sorry for third comment – I had thought 2nd comment got spammed.
Where did I say that black skin was thinner? I didn’t. I clearly wrote “same thickness” – quoting a site.
The upshot seems to be that black skin has same thickness but more layers and more fibroblasts, giving it greater strength and elasticity.
I think the facial sharpness issue is a myth. I think it’s the skin.
September 3rd, 2010 at 10:31 am
If Black skin has more layers than White but is not thicker overall then the putative ‘extra’ layer of Black skin must be very thin it’s the outermost layers collectively that most people are thinking of when they talk about ‘skin’ and in this sense skin is indeed thicker in Black Africans.
“the facial sharpness issue is a myth”
Only for someone ‘too lazy’ to look at the projecting brows of Henry Cooper or Chuck “the Bayonne Bleeder” Wepner
September 3rd, 2010 at 1:31 pm
Can you supply links discussing your understanding about skin thickness?