looking for good books

To help counter the creationist literature, a good place to start is Douglas Futuyma's "Science on Trial" or Niles Eldredge's "The Triumph of Evolution". For some very readable, non-dogmatic evolution books I can't recommend E.O. Wilson's "The Diversity of Life" more highly. For a slightly more technical read - but still written for the layperson - try Ernst Mayr's "What Evolution Is". For cultural evolution of the last 10,000 years or so - try Jared Diamond's "Guns, Germs and Steel". Finally, for the biological evolution of humans and the coevolution of culture, you might like Paul Ehrlich's "Human Natures : Genes Cultures and the Human Prospect". I'll leave the bonesy bits out - someone else can recommend a good paleontology book.If you're feeling ambitious, and would like a somewhat more technical treatment of evolution that doesn't quite reach the "textbook" stage, try Ernst Mayr's "Evolution and the Diversity of Life".Happy reading!BTW: If you want, ask your friend to come to evcforum (but warn us so she doesn't get eaten alive on the first post ). There are people here who can probably answer any question she'd care to pose...

Asgara,I just realized I hadn't answered your question. I have a better idea. If your friend is interested, and really has no background as you suggest, then I would bag the books at first. My recommendation would be to rent and view together the marvelous PBS series "Evolution" on video. It's visually spectacular, well presented, non-dogmatic, and quite understandable. I bought it last year for my 11-yr old, who totally devoured the series (several times!). THEN, if she's still interested, get the companion book, Carl Zimmer's "Evolution: The Triumph of an Idea" for her to read. I'll admit my daughter has had a significant exposure to science and nature, having accompanied me on dozens of field trips, but even so the series shouldn't be beyond the capability of any reasonably intelligent person. Plus it's verrry compelling.

Hi Defender: Since I'm the one that first recommended the book, I suppose it makes sense that I reply to this. Eldredge's book is quite unashamedly anti-creationist. It was written to counter the (at the time) quite mainstream YEC assertions, and does a pretty good job of giving the concensus opinion of science/scientists on the particular issues covered. I recommended it because Asgara had asked for a counter to some of the basic creationist positions. In spite of your denials, and in spite of AiG's "Arguments we feel creationists should no longer use", most of the "invalid" arguments are still being espoused by a large percentage of YEC's. Hovind, Baugh and others are still promulgating the exact same fallacies - and in fact are spending even more time doing so than they were when the book was first published. At least, based on the continual references to those arguments from self-proclaimed evilution-slayers that come on these message boards.I note that you say you've "heard about" the book, rather than reading it. As an aside, I have spent many interesting hours perusing the AiG and ICR websites and articles. My question to you is more fundamental than how you can denigrate a book without having actually read it. Rather, have you read ANY mainstream book dealing with biology or evolution? I don't mean Dawkins. I mean, Wilson or Futuyma or Mayr, or even Quammon ("Song of the Dodo") or Barlow ("Ghosts of Evolution") or Weiner ("Beak of the Finch"). If so, which ones? And if so, what was it about the book that you found uncompelling or faulty? I think that might be a more productive approach here.

Hey Defender,I don't want to come across like I'm begging out of your challenge. However, what you propose is a hell of a lot more work than I'm willing to devote to something that doesn't earn me money. Besides, I'm not much of a book critic. I have read several creationist books, including Johnson's "Darwin on Trial" and Wells' "Icons of Evolution", and although I don't mind chewing on one or more the topics in either book (especially "Icons"), I would in no wise be able to take the time necessary to do a complete review. So I guess your challenge has gone unmet. Now you can brag to all your creationist friends that you "defeated the evilutionists who couldn't meet" your challenge, or whatever it is that creationists do when something like this comes up.

And then, Mr. H has done a remarkable job of meeting your challenge, based around "Darwin on Trial". Certainly looks like a first pass at a creditable response to your challenge. This thread.