Primer on Evolution & Origins

[Alethias]

So, I generally agree that the evidence points towards natural selection thru descent, and that the universe is most certainly a helluva lot older that creationists seem to believe. Much of the evidence out there is, to put it simply, overwhelming.

Can anyone point me in the direction of some type of primer on the subject that is readable for someone like me that doesn't have a technical background in the subject but has interest in being able to answer questions from detractors?

[Occam's Aftershave]

So, I generally agree that the evidence points towards natural selection thru descent, and that the universe is most certainly a helluva lot older that creationists seem to believe. Much of the evidence out there is, to put it simply, overwhelming.

Can anyone point me in the direction of some type of primer on the subject that is readable for someone like me that doesn't have a technical background in the subject but has interest in being able to answer questions from detractors?

Here is a good site, hosted by the U.C. Berkeley Museum of Paleontology

Understanding Evolution (http://evolution.berkeley.edu/)

Enjoy!

[ericmurphy]

So, I generally agree that the evidence points towards natural selection thru descent, and that the universe is most certainly a helluva lot older that creationists seem to believe. Much of the evidence out there is, to put it simply, overwhelming.

Can anyone point me in the direction of some type of primer on the subject that is readable for someone like me that doesn't have a technical background in the subject but has interest in being able to answer questions from detractors?

And, of course, the old standby (http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc/). A bit technical, but worth it. From the introduction:

This article directly addresses the scientific evidence in favor of common descent and macroevolution. This article is specifically intended for those who are scientifically minded but, for one reason or another, have come to believe that macroevolutionary theory explains little, makes few or no testable predictions, is unfalsifiable, or has not been scientifically demonstrated.

[Alethias]

Those both look like worthwhile reads.

I don't mind a bit technical. I have a fair bit of training in logical analysis, but have a distinct lack of knowledge regarding technical terminology.

I'll have to read later. Thanks!

[Worldtraveller]

Are you tying to tell us we need to get a sticky going? :p

Alright, let's drag Oolon's ass out here and put him to work!! :D

Cheers,
Lane

[Alethias]

Are you tying to tell us we need to get a sticky going? :p

Alright, let's drag Oolon's ass out here and put him to work!! :D

Cheers,
LaneNo, but now that you mention it... :D

I've got a Calvinist fundy friend that is always spouting shit when he sees me. He's been on an anti-evilution kick here lately.

Some of the posts here are fascinating, but some of the threads I read just totally lose me in short order. I have technical training in logic and computer systems and systems analysis and multiple computer languages, but much of this stuff seems a language all its own to me.

[Occam's Aftershave]

No, but now that you mention it... :D

I've got a Calvinist fundy friend that is always spouting shit when he sees me. He's been on an anti-evilution kick here lately.

Some of the posts here are fascinating, but some of the threads I read just totally lose me in short order. I have technical training in logic and computer systems and systems analysis and multiple computer languages, but much of this stuff seems a language all its own to me.
Invite him over here. We'll straighten him out in short order. ;)