Biology Review

biology made simple cover

Biology Made Simple
Revised Edition
Hanauer
1972 (original copyright 1956)

This came to me with a couple of notations (blacked out to avoid identifying information): 2 separate notices from libraries about the damage in the book. None of the notices were recent. The damage noted a cracked binding and some torn pages. I would also like to add the yellowing pages and some mystery stains as well.

This is essentially a course review. I think this must have been something that would have been used as a basic course outline for an equivalency test. I am going to go out on a limb and suggest that perhaps this needs to be updated. Even if a student was looking for a course outline on biology, I would imagine that there would be more current outlines available. I can’t even imagine anyone would pick this up and think it was adequate preparation for a AP Biology exam or something similar.

This is a weeder about any way you slice it. It has sustained some damage and is outdated. (Really outdated!)

Mary

back cover

cell structure

geological time

0

12 comments

  1. But being so old can be a benefit too: I’m betting the “Evolution” chapter hadn’t been nerfed by young-earthers!

    +5
    1. True, but it wouldn’t have Lucy, the Denisovans, the “hobbits”, probably still has ape-like Neanderthals…

      But yeah, I suspect God didn’t get much of a look-in here.

      +2
    2. Actually that wouldn’t be a benefit. Kids should learn both sides of the evidence and see that it can be interpreted multiple ways rather than feeding only one view. People should be open to the idea that it actually supports a young earth.

      0
      1. Representing both evolution, Creationism, and Intelligent Design I can get behind. Young Earth though is as stupid as Flat Earth and Hollow Earth. Even many devout Christians agree that the Earth is much, much older than people think. So Young Earth should never be part of any sane curriculum.

        +2
        1. I never understood why evolution precludes, in some people’s minds, the idea of intelligent design. By asserting that evolution doesn’t include God, aren’t they making their god small and ineffectual?

          +1
      2. Presumably religious materials are available in most libraries as well. I don’t think science books have any responsibility to include faith-based, non-scientific viewpoints.

        +11
  2. I had Chemistry Made Simple as a study aid back in the 1980s. As I recall it was a pretty decent resource at the time, so newer editions (if they’re still around) are probably worthwhile. The series might have been eclipsed by For Dummies, which has a similar level of information.

    +1
  3. Outdated and gross. Shame on whoever added the second notice for not weeding it then.

    +1
  4. Even if the science hasn’t changed much, what modern reader is going to stick with something this text heavy that only has black and white illustrations? Especially with the cool coloring book-type course outlines now available? This one is still in the library because it’s not attractive enough to be stolen!

    +4
    1. They were just lying around taking up space till Eisenhower put ’em to work.

      +3

Comments are closed.