Freethought & Rationalism Archive

MOJO-JOJO · 01-09-2002, 07:36 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by cricket:
Which means, for many adults I know, these books would be wayyy over their heads.

er....just Evangelist adults.

MOJO-JOJO · 01-09-2002, 07:38 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by cricket:
unless y'all recommend reading a different one next.

How did "y'all" evolve into your speech? You're from St. Louis...

cricket · 01-09-2002, 05:44 PM

Jus' tryin' to evolve into a charmin' Southron belle!

Actually I never say "y'all" IRL, but I use it in posts because it sounds classier than "you-guys".

I think of "y'all" as a better choice than "you-guys". It just sounds better.

Not *much* better, though.

Ms. Siv · 01-16-2002, 06:28 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Amen-Moses:


Well if you've read the other two then the Blind Watchmaker is just revision.

Amen-Moses

Read the Selfish Gene first.
And hey, a 16-year old could understand Dawkins books !

- Sivakami.

Secular Elation · 01-21-2002, 06:47 PM

And hey, a 16-year old could understand Dawkins books !

Well, I'm 17 years of age and I am reading Climbing Mount Improbable. I haven't read any of it yet, but I will at least finish the first chapter tonight.

cricket · 01-21-2002, 08:35 PM

Guess what I got tonight.

Unweaving the Rainbow.

Ms. Siv · 01-22-2002, 02:32 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Secular Elation:
And hey, a 16-year old could understand Dawkins books !

Well, I'm 17 years of age and I am reading Climbing Mount Improbable. I haven't read any of it yet, but I will at least finish the first chapter tonight.

Happy reading !

BTW also do read all his online writings at world-of-dawkins.com. They're all good.

- Sivakami.

cricket · 01-22-2002, 02:35 AM

Siv is it true he emails you?

I've been up all night reading UTR; have to go to work soon. Not very smart of me!

Jayhawker Soule · 01-22-2002, 03:02 AM

I'm somewhat embarrassed to ask, but would somebody please summarize the Gould/Dawkins debate/dispute? Thanks.

kwigibo · 01-22-2002, 03:13 AM

AFAIK, it has to do with punctuated equilibra. Gould (and some other guys as well) has a theory that evolution is somewhat static for most of the time, punctuated by bursts of rapid development. Dawkins dismisses this as to much of an adherence to fossil evidence as is, and that there are gradualist explanations for jumps in the fossil record. However his major complaint is that gould is being a whore to a media hungry for anything that seems mildly anti-evolution, even if it is only anti-mainstream evolutionary theory.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

01-09-2002, 05:44 PM	#13
cricket Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2001 Location: St Louis MO USA Posts: 1,188	Jus' tryin' to evolve into a charmin' Southron belle! Actually I never say "y'all" IRL, but I use it in posts because it sounds classier than "you-guys". I think of "y'all" as a better choice than "you-guys". It just sounds better. Not much better, though.

01-21-2002, 06:47 PM	#15
Secular Elation Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2001 Location: California Posts: 6,196	And hey, a 16-year old could understand Dawkins books ! Well, I'm 17 years of age and I am reading Climbing Mount Improbable. I haven't read any of it yet, but I will at least finish the first chapter tonight.

01-21-2002, 08:35 PM	#16
cricket Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2001 Location: St Louis MO USA Posts: 1,188	Guess what I got tonight. Unweaving the Rainbow.

01-22-2002, 02:35 AM	#18
cricket Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2001 Location: St Louis MO USA Posts: 1,188	Siv is it true he emails you? I've been up all night reading UTR; have to go to work soon. Not very smart of me!

01-22-2002, 03:02 AM	#19
Jayhawker Soule Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Chicago Posts: 1,777	I'm somewhat embarrassed to ask, but would somebody please summarize the Gould/Dawkins debate/dispute? Thanks.

01-22-2002, 03:13 AM	#20
kwigibo Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2000 Location: Gold Coast, QLD, Australia Posts: 5,814	AFAIK, it has to do with punctuated equilibra. Gould (and some other guys as well) has a theory that evolution is somewhat static for most of the time, punctuated by bursts of rapid development. Dawkins dismisses this as to much of an adherence to fossil evidence as is, and that there are gradualist explanations for jumps in the fossil record. However his major complaint is that gould is being a whore to a media hungry for anything that seems mildly anti-evolution, even if it is only anti-mainstream evolutionary theory.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.