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
982 Views
selection for suitability
- 06/08/2011 04:18:51 PM
634 Views
Thanks for your responce 
- 06/08/2011 04:41:20 PM
749 Views
- 06/08/2011 04:41:20 PM
749 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
679 Views
Just a question
- 06/08/2011 07:18:09 PM
682 Views
Yes it can
- 06/08/2011 07:41:59 PM
558 Views
But how?
- 06/08/2011 07:52:10 PM
750 Views
Re: Just a question
- 06/08/2011 07:49:21 PM
770 Views
I'm not sure I understand you
- 06/08/2011 08:20:44 PM
658 Views
All tautologies are truisms, but not all truisms are tautologies.
- 06/08/2011 09:38:12 PM
683 Views
Then it is still a tautology
- 06/08/2011 09:45:33 PM
695 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
790 Views
Maybe...
- 07/08/2011 01:55:54 PM
642 Views
I'm more inclined toward his logic, but possibly toward your conclusions.
- 09/08/2011 12:45:46 AM
731 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
794 Views
As I understand it
- 06/08/2011 06:04:44 PM
624 Views
Better...
- 06/08/2011 06:36:38 PM
609 Views
Did you perhaps mean "beneficial in the environment" rather than "beneficial to the environment"?
- 06/08/2011 06:34:44 PM
745 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
674 Views
Hmmm... there's some truth to that
- 06/08/2011 06:36:35 PM
693 Views
The complexity of the problem makes it all but impossible to falsify...
- 06/08/2011 08:26:06 PM
731 Views
The questions go deeper
- 06/08/2011 08:38:31 PM
727 Views
Re: The questions go deeper
- 06/08/2011 09:10:32 PM
702 Views
I think I know why you don't understand my question.
- 06/08/2011 09:38:41 PM
734 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
700 Views
Thanks a lot
- 07/08/2011 01:38:39 PM
842 Views
2 things
- 07/08/2011 04:00:35 PM
619 Views
Re: 2 things
- 07/08/2011 04:33:00 PM
830 Views
Re: 2 things
- 07/08/2011 05:48:26 PM
644 Views
My best guess
- 07/08/2011 06:00:28 PM
678 Views
Re: My best guess
- 07/08/2011 06:37:58 PM
617 Views
Re: My best guess
- 07/08/2011 06:47:26 PM
765 Views
Re: My best guess
- 07/08/2011 07:02:27 PM
613 Views