Here’s me grudgingly getting on the bandwagon and helping in the dissemination of the Tree of Life video with David Attenborough.

It’s very pretty. And all the facts are correct, so far as I’m aware. But this video still makes my skin crawl a bit. Why? Because it’s pretty much a perfect illustration of one of the problems I discussed in my post on tree thinking. Here’s evolution depicted as a linear process, with a clear line of progression from the simplest forms of life towards … well, humans, of course. What else?

They do mention insects invading land long before vertebrates did, which is nice. And there’s a short digression into dinosaur territory. But still - the video essentially supports a view of life where evolution inexorably works towards its goal, which is apparently primates with large brains. A tiny group of animals on an earth veritably crawling with other much more abundant forms of life. A self-centered, egotistical species, who cannot for a moment let go of the idea that we’re the pinnacle of creation, whether that creation was effected by a god or physical processes.

Also the video fails to point out that mammals came from the very same lineage Attenborough claims is ancestral to today’s tortoises, snakes, lizards, crocodiles and dinosaurs (including birds). It’s like mammals simply turn up by magic and start taking over the earth once the dinosaurs are gone.

And of course, there’s the glaring omission of the huge part of the tree of life that’s not animal. Plants and fungi are pretty much entirely ignored, bacteria are mentioned briefly and archaea not at all. This is ok, of course - the study of animals is obviously bound to be extra interesting to animals capable of appreciating said study - but I find it disingenious to call it a study of the tree of life when in fact we’re just looking at one of the several main branches.

But. It feels wrong to be critical of Attenborough. He has probably done more to popularise biology than anyone, and although he’s not a scientist he usually gets his facts straight (which, lately, feels more like a boon than it should) - so who am I to complain? Here’s a couple of things I really like about the video:

Firstly, Attenborough states that life began 3000 million years ago, rather than 3 billion. This is a very nice rhetorical trick to make people start realising just how vast a span of time we’re talking about. Graphically, the fact that the tips of the branches are all at the same level somewhat counteracts the idea that any living species is at the “top” of the tree. All living species are! Finally, the video does end with Attenborough pointing out that we mammals actually share the world with many other lineages.

So, Sir Attenborough, should you by any chance read this - I still love you. Just don’t do it again, ok? Now go to your room.

attenborough, tree of life, biology, evolution