Product Description

This thought-provoking book questions fundamentally some of the foundation stones of Darwinism, which have become almost scientific 'givens' in recent years. Using detailed biological arguments and his own intricate knowledge of anatomy gained through training and work as a doctor, Antony Latham challenges the suggestion that the flora and fauna of the world in which we live have come about through a series of astonishingly unlikely mutations. The author differentiates between micro-evolution, for which there is indisputable evidence, and macro-evolution. The former simply involves the reorganisation of existing DNA to bring about adaptations which are clearly to a creature's advantage. The latter claims to involve the introduction of completely new DNA in evolutionary change; it is this premise that he takes head on. In doing this he also looks in fascinating detail at the fossil record.

Product Details

• Amazon Sales Rank: #26627 in Books
• Published on: 2005-06-01
• Original language: English
• Number of items: 1
• Binding: Paperback
• 257 pages

Review
"In the Naked Emperor Dr Antony Latham showcases the powerful scientific argument that the universe and life were purposely designed. His deconstruction of Richard Dawkins' reasoning is made even more compelling by the fairness and moderation of his critique." Michael Behe, Professor of Biochemistry, Lehigh University, USA. Author of Darwin's Black Box."For the past hundred years Darwinian evolution has sustained the edifice of western secular thought with its promise of a naturalistic explanation for the infinite variety and diversity of life. But for how much longer? Antony Latham's lucid account of the current scientific challenges to Darwinian orthodoxy promises a revolution for biology and a profound reassessment of man's place in the cosmos." James le Fanu, Columnist, Daily Telegraph."I have met clever people who cunningly argue that black is white. They lead me through a bewilderment of causes and effects, all entirely logical, before triumphantly proclaiming that black must indeed be white. I am left gapingly wondering which sequence was faulty in moving the argument from A to B, or Z. So why, if I find the existence of a creator just one step harder than the non-existence of any such entity, am I bothering to review this book? The answer is that is well done. The research, is good. The quotes are widespread, and the writing acceptable. All manner of relevant arguments are packed within it. Very soon black does equal white, and Darwin is without clothing, as many have suspected all along." Anthony Smith, The Galton Institute."I would agree and expect that a widespread collapse of Darwinism is inevitable in the not-too-distant future. The Naked Emperor cradles a wealth of information supporting this prediction." Dr Wayne Frair, Journal of Creation.

James le Fanu, Columnist, Daily Telegraph
Antony Latham's lucid account of the current scientific challenges to Darwinian orthodoxy promises a revolution for biology....

Paul Johnson, The Spectator, August 27 2005
The indictment of Dawkins' scientific scholarship is powerful, masterly and (I would say) unanswerable.

Customer Reviews

Not quite perfect, but well worth a read
This is a remarkable book that I thoroughly recommend to anyone interested in the evolution/creationism debate.

On the face of it, there are at least three reasons one might give this book a miss. It is written by an 'amateur' to the evolution world (Dr Latham is a GP in the Outer Hebrides, of all places!); he is quite upfront about being a Christian and a creationist (though certainly no six-day fundamentalist); and the book is published by Janus, which seems only one step removed from a 'vanity press'. But perhaps the fact that Darwin himself was also an 'amateur', a largely self-taught naturalist, might encourage the reader to put aside these cover-judgements and open the book; if so, he or she will be well rewarded.

The striking accomplishment of this book is how very well informed Dr Latham is about his subject. He writes with considerable authority, quoting and analysing passages from mainstream textbooks on biology and palaeontology as well as original research from Nature, PNAS and other highly respected journals. He is on sufficiently personal terms with Simon Conway Morris that Professor Conway Morris reviewed and corrected his manuscript (Stephen Jay Gould cannot claim as much!). Amateur or not, this man clearly knows his stuff.

His writing style is clear, straightforward, and well-referenced, with a heavy emphasis on the scientific merits and flaws of the argument. He is at pains to emphasise key points, and also to highlight any passages that some readers might wish to gloss over as too 'technical'. While very readable, his style is a little dry, and he lacks the talent for metaphor and analogy that has made Richard Dawkins so popular - or perhaps he deliberately avoids it, as he does not hesitate to tear apart some of Dawkins' weaker analogies. His points are well referenced, with a useful bibliography at the back; however, an index was sorely missed.

The bulk of the book is a scientific critique of the claims of neo-Darwinism to fully explain the origins and diversity of life on earth. I am not enough of a palaeontologist to judge the merits of his argument, but he makes a strong case that the current concept of natural selection operating on phenotype variation caused by DNA mutation, while adequate to explain micro-evolution, is inadequate to explain macro-evolution, speciation and the fossil record as we see it. He also points out that even among the palaeontology establishment there are some doubts, with quotes from such respected mainstream names as Euan Clarkson, Michael Benton (not Denton!) and Henry Gee. I was somewhat disappointed by his fairly non-critical chapter on irreducible complexity; he makes no mention of exaptation as counter-argument to irreducible complexity, and puts great weight on the example of the bacterial flagellum without mentioning the Type Three Secretory System that may (or may not) have been its evolutionary precursor. But despite these worrying omissions, I was both educated and impressed by the evidence he presented; while I'm not convinced it adds up to proof of a creator, it certainly left me feeling Darwinism still has a lot of explaining to do.

The last two chapters of the book slightly spoilt it, I felt. A chapter on Darwin's life and influences, while informative, balanced and well-argued, had something of an 'ad hominem' flavour to it that detracted from the dispassionately scientific tone taken up to then. The final chapter, a detailed critique of Richard Dawkins' 'The Blind Watchmaker', was again well-argued and a powerful refutation of some of Dawkins' arguments; but with a shrill, almost propagandistic tone that was again at odds with the rest of the book.

Despite these minor criticisms, I found this an excellent book: eminently readable, and of great interest to a layman who is interested in evolution but lacks the time to sift through the scientific evidence first-hand. Fans of Richard Dawkins, Stephen Jay Gould, and Michael Behe alike would all be well advised to read this.

excellent read
This book makes an excellent read, it doesn't only open the readers mind to the amazing diversity of life on this planet but also goes on to ask the question, did we evolve or were we created. After reading this book, one is left with more questions than answers. A must read.

Darwinism cannot explain everything
Latham's book repeatedly targets the views of Richard Dawkins (see especially the whole of chapter 15), because "Dawkins has made himself the principal apologist for Darwinism for our generation and must therefore be taken very seriously" (preface, p. v).

But Latham does not write against Dawkins personally, but against the Darwinism on which Dawkins depends.

Latham tackles head-on the Darwinian theory that all life has evolved from a single source by gradual random changes. Latham (p. 84) quotes Darwin in The Origin of Species: "If it could be demonstrated that any complex organ existed which could not possibly have been formed by numerous, successive, slight modifications, my theory would absolutely break down". Latham comments immediately: "Darwinists must take these words very seriously because we are now at the stage when an accumulation of facts does in fact lead us to severely doubt that any such gradual process has ever produced complex organs. This is backed up by our knowledge of the inability of mutations to bring about such macro changes ... "

The author concludes: "If there is one thing I hope the reader will take on board it is the absolute lack of any clear model available to science which can explain the existence of life. Darwinism has been shown to be a totally inadequate explanation - apart from the micro-evolutionary level.... All the evidence ... has led me to believe that life has been designed and that all the major innovations have occurred in saltations, the like of which no Darwinist can explain. The evidence before us shows us that a creator has been active throughout." (p. 249).

Latham endlessly repeats that micro-evolution within species, e.g. the famous Galapagos finches, is scientifically certain, and must be accepted; but that there is no proof that macro-evolution, change outside the species group, ever happened by the required Darwinian method of "numerous, successive, slight modifications". Latham concludes: Darwin, faced with the further fossil and genetics knowledge since his day, "as a scientist and a basically humble man ... would now be seeking a totally different solution" (p. 44). Darwin's theory has `absolutely broken down'.

Latham examines many cases in detail. I pick out two.

First, the first tetrapods. Latham concludes (pp. 76,77) both that there is an unexplained sudden leap [a saltation], in lifestyle and locomotion from water to land, and that there is nevertheless a linkage between the first land animals and fish. "This [latter consideration] does not validate Darwinism, however. These [first tetrapods] are not `transitional' in the sense that Darwin meant and longed for. We see too much that is suddenly new to call the first tetrapods transitional. There is no gradual evolution here but we do see earlier forms being a sort of template for the creation of later forms. The appearance of tetrapods is sudden and is just one of the saltations (leaps of form) that characterize the fossil record ... there are indeed totally unexplained yawning gaps in the fossil record but ... also continuity between succeeding forms - hence the fish-like characteristics of the first tetrapods. They appear with all the attributes of land walkers, suddenly - but retain signs of their lineage. Darwinism requires smooth continuity always. We do not see this ... The transition [from fish to tetrapod] is sudden. Darwinists will put this down to inadequate fossil preservation, but this argument is now wearing thin. The challenge to the Darwinist is to show us even one case in the history of life where a macro change has occurred smoothly with well-defined, gradually transitional intermediate forms. Darwin waited and we still wait." Challenging stuff!

The second case concerns Homo sapiens, discussed in the must-read Chapter 6: hominids, Ardipithecus, `Lucy', Ramapithecus, Australopithecus, Homo erectus, Neanderthal man, et al. Latham says (p. 110): " ... what evidence we have indicates a massive saltational leap from the preceding Homo erectus [to Homo sapiens] and astounding changes in a brain which triples in size within just 3 million years. There is absolutely no evidence for gradual change". Latham again: "Are we descended from apes or not? It is clear that we are not in the sense that Darwin meant. It has definitely not been a question of gradual evolution. Saltations require something more than chance and selection: they require design and purpose." (p. 111).

Space is running out. Briefly:

1) Latham insists that `natural selection' can only select mutations that are already there. "Selection is not creative" (p. 146). Darwinism does not adequately explain the process of mutation.

2) Latham significantly suggests (in chapter 14) that Darwin makes his system exclude God from the universe. This could derive from the influence of Darwin's unbelieving grandfather and freethinking Edinburgh friend Grant. Keeping God out of our universe excuses us from seeing God as being in any way concerned with suffering and evil in the world. The theodicy of Milton's Paradise Lost (Darwin took a copy on the Beagle) is relevant.

3) Latham detects a swing among scientists now towards anti-Darwinism. "It is not that leading scientists do not realise these mistakes [in Darwinism]. It is just that they rarely feel free to openly say so" (p. 171). "There is enormous inertia in the Darwinian paradigm - but shift it will." (p. 245). Latham backs Intelligent Design. Michael Behe's 1996 book, `Darwin's Black Box', "may well be historic in the turning of the tide against Darwinism." (p. 129). Behe's follow-up volume, `The Edge of Evolution - The Search for the Limits of Darwinism', appeared in 2007.

4) Latham: "There are no mechanisms that we can see or even imagine in the genetics of life that will produce a creature such as a human. We are left with no alternative but to see another force at work - one which modern science does not feel comfortable with but with which we must reckon. We are made by design and purpose and by a power that we have no idea of ... creatures are created" (p. 148).