As for Dawkins, I've read one of his books a few years ago and was unimpressed. I've done a minor in biology and geology, just to get some of the basics and jargon, so I'd prefer something more substantial if you don't mind.
I wouldn't call myself a Dawkins disciple so I am not pushing it because it was written by him; I am pushing it because the book is truly great from a science perspective. Give his book a chance, it is written simply, he goes through tremendous lengths to explain terminology and really it the best book to read in order to gather an understanding of the subject. After reading his book (if you want more) I would then use his book as a guide and find texts books on genetics, biochemistry, biological physics and others, to further your understanding. What I know has come from years of studying text books (I am finishing my PhD in plant physiology) and Dawkins’s book would have made it much simpler if I would have started there and then went on to the texts.
You could also read Darwin in you haven’t.
This message last edited by Night Walker on 07/08/2011 at 07:07:34 PM
Natural selection
- 06/08/2011 03:51:26 PM
980 Views
selection for suitability
- 06/08/2011 04:18:51 PM
632 Views
Thanks for your responce 
- 06/08/2011 04:41:20 PM
746 Views
- 06/08/2011 04:41:20 PM
746 Views
I can't speak for LadyLorraine and won't try, but here's how I see it:
- 06/08/2011 06:49:49 PM
677 Views
Just a question
- 06/08/2011 07:18:09 PM
680 Views
Yes it can
- 06/08/2011 07:41:59 PM
556 Views
But how?
- 06/08/2011 07:52:10 PM
749 Views
Re: Just a question
- 06/08/2011 07:49:21 PM
768 Views
I'm not sure I understand you
- 06/08/2011 08:20:44 PM
656 Views
All tautologies are truisms, but not all truisms are tautologies.
- 06/08/2011 09:38:12 PM
681 Views
Then it is still a tautology
- 06/08/2011 09:45:33 PM
693 Views
You can know it's beneifical to a particular individual, but it's harder to say for populations.
- 06/08/2011 10:18:16 PM
788 Views
Maybe...
- 07/08/2011 01:55:54 PM
640 Views
I'm more inclined toward his logic, but possibly toward your conclusions.
- 09/08/2011 12:45:46 AM
729 Views
we can't really know ahead of time what makes a specific trait benefical in that environment
- 09/08/2011 06:16:02 PM
792 Views
As I understand it
- 06/08/2011 06:04:44 PM
622 Views
Better...
- 06/08/2011 06:36:38 PM
607 Views
Did you perhaps mean "beneficial in the environment" rather than "beneficial to the environment"?
- 06/08/2011 06:34:44 PM
743 Views
yes. I did not really phrase that very clearly. *NM*
- 09/08/2011 06:14:11 PM
293 Views
No biggy; from what Bram said, I underestimated how well you were understood anyway.
- 09/08/2011 06:45:16 PM
671 Views
Hmmm... there's some truth to that
- 06/08/2011 06:36:35 PM
690 Views
The complexity of the problem makes it all but impossible to falsify...
- 06/08/2011 08:26:06 PM
729 Views
The questions go deeper
- 06/08/2011 08:38:31 PM
725 Views
Re: The questions go deeper
- 06/08/2011 09:10:32 PM
700 Views
I think I know why you don't understand my question.
- 06/08/2011 09:38:41 PM
732 Views
How many equation's has Moraine screwed up? 
*NM*
- 06/08/2011 09:45:36 PM
303 Views
*NM*
- 06/08/2011 09:45:36 PM
303 Views
100% I think Moriaine is a very beneficial trait that contributes a lot to the RAFO pool *NM*
- 06/08/2011 09:46:54 PM
323 Views
*NM*
- 06/08/2011 09:46:54 PM
323 Views
Re: Natural selection
- 07/08/2011 03:00:30 AM
699 Views
Thanks a lot
- 07/08/2011 01:38:39 PM
840 Views
2 things
- 07/08/2011 04:00:35 PM
618 Views
Re: 2 things
- 07/08/2011 04:33:00 PM
828 Views
Re: 2 things
- 07/08/2011 05:48:26 PM
643 Views
My best guess
- 07/08/2011 06:00:28 PM
676 Views
Re: My best guess
- 07/08/2011 06:37:58 PM
615 Views
Re: My best guess
- 07/08/2011 06:47:26 PM
764 Views
Re: My best guess
- 07/08/2011 07:02:27 PM
612 Views