Here are some nice things people said about The Science Of Sin

Dr Michael Mosley has been presenting science shows for the BBC for over ten years. I worked with him on a great BBC Earth series (NB not broadcast in the UK) called Meet The Humans. He was kind enough to find time in his busy schedule to give The Science Of Sin a read at very short notice. I’m greatly indebted to him for lending me his eyes. And for being nice.

Johnny Ball is the reason I got into science in the first place. [For US readers: he’s our version of Bill Nye the science guy] When I was a primary school kid in the 80’s I’d usually get home after a hard day in the classroom and watch the box. Flicking through the channels I stumbled on a science show presented by Johnny and watched him demonstrating how you could propel a small boat through a trough of water using the chemical power of bicarbonate of soda. I found myself enthralled by his enthusiastic delivery.

It just so happened that the previous week we had covered the same topic in a science lesson, yet it had left me pretty disinterested. I distinctly remember wondering how it could be possible for something I had found quite dull could suddenly become so fascinating just a few days later. That fateful day I learned the value of enthusiasm that borders on the eccentric when it comes to getting people who are not particularly interested in science to sit up and take notice.

I have tried to emulate his example every step of the way. Thank you Johnny Ball for getting me excited about science, for inspiring me to learn as much about it as I possibly can and for showing me the way in terms of delivering what could be considered dull with a little sparkle. I am much obliged to you for providing me with these kind words…

One thought on “Here are some nice things people said about The Science Of Sin

  1. Mark Smith says:

    Hello Jack. Firstly, thanks for a very interesting book launch at the Bart’s Pathology Museum tonight.
    At the end of your presentation you were asked a question by a vicar which you seemed unable to answer. It was along the lines of why would evolution allow traits that appear to be harmful to us? I think, given more time to think, you would probably have been able to answer this question as I believe you touched on the possible answer when you spoke about gluttony during your talk.
    I didn’t feel confident enough speak in public, but I think I have a possible answer and hope you don’t mind me posting it here.
    Most people assume that evolutionary changes are beneficial. Not necessarily so. They are only beneficial if they give that species an advantage within their environment. Of course, if the evolutionary change gives a disadvantage that species is less likely to survive.
    Most of us would agree that fins and gills have certainly given marine creatures advantages over most non marine animals, however, should their environment change eg through global warming, and the water dry up, they would then be at a great disadvantage, literally fish out of water.
    So I suspect that the traits you discussed, eg gluttony, would, in the right environment offer an advantage, as it almost certainly did our ancestors at some stage.
    However, humans as a species, have developed technology so much faster than evolution, they have created an environment that isn’t natural. They can survive in conditions that once would have killed them. So while these traits may be harmful in their extreme we have the ability to overcome evolution and still survive.
    Or have we? For all we know they may actually one day become detrimental to our survival bacause they are no longer an advantage in our environment. Time will tell.
    My apologies for such a long winded explanation, but thanks for listening.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *