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
- 1085 Views
selection for suitability
06/08/2011 04:18:51 PM
- 731 Views
Thanks for your responce
06/08/2011 04:41:20 PM
- 846 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
- 793 Views
Just a question
06/08/2011 07:18:09 PM
- 774 Views
Yes it can
06/08/2011 07:41:59 PM
- 654 Views
But how?
06/08/2011 07:52:10 PM
- 849 Views
Re: Just a question
06/08/2011 07:49:21 PM
- 870 Views
I'm not sure I understand you
06/08/2011 08:20:44 PM
- 772 Views
All tautologies are truisms, but not all truisms are tautologies.
06/08/2011 09:38:12 PM
- 793 Views
Then it is still a tautology
06/08/2011 09:45:33 PM
- 801 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
- 904 Views
Maybe...
07/08/2011 01:55:54 PM
- 758 Views
I'm more inclined toward his logic, but possibly toward your conclusions.
09/08/2011 12:45:46 AM
- 839 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
- 898 Views
As I understand it
06/08/2011 06:04:44 PM
- 724 Views
Better...
06/08/2011 06:36:38 PM
- 704 Views
Did you perhaps mean "beneficial in the environment" rather than "beneficial to the environment"?
06/08/2011 06:34:44 PM
- 828 Views
yes. I did not really phrase that very clearly. *NM*
09/08/2011 06:14:11 PM
- 333 Views
No biggy; from what Bram said, I underestimated how well you were understood anyway.
09/08/2011 06:45:16 PM
- 774 Views
Hmmm... there's some truth to that
06/08/2011 06:36:35 PM
- 805 Views
The complexity of the problem makes it all but impossible to falsify...
06/08/2011 08:26:06 PM
- 827 Views
The questions go deeper
06/08/2011 08:38:31 PM
- 818 Views
Re: The questions go deeper
06/08/2011 09:10:32 PM
- 808 Views
I think I know why you don't understand my question.
06/08/2011 09:38:41 PM
- 830 Views
How many equation's has Moraine screwed up?
*NM*
06/08/2011 09:45:36 PM
- 342 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
- 364 Views


Re: Natural selection
07/08/2011 03:00:30 AM
- 803 Views
Thanks a lot
07/08/2011 01:38:39 PM
- 947 Views
2 things
07/08/2011 04:00:35 PM
- 711 Views
Re: 2 things
07/08/2011 04:33:00 PM
- 927 Views
Re: 2 things
07/08/2011 05:48:26 PM
- 741 Views
My best guess
07/08/2011 06:00:28 PM
- 777 Views
Re: My best guess
07/08/2011 06:37:58 PM
- 715 Views
Re: My best guess
07/08/2011 06:47:26 PM
- 874 Views
Re: My best guess
07/08/2011 07:02:27 PM
- 719 Views