What one book to recommend to a creationist?

[Dcdrac]

any book about the basiscs of how science works would be a good start

 

[Humes fork]

If you're going to recommend a web site instead of a book, I would much rather point him here:

"Evolution 101": http://evolution.berkeley.edu/evolibrary/article/evo_01

I have for a while looked to improve my understanding of evolution. That was a wonderfully great link. Thank you.

I just want to say that I would not recommend Dawkins's The Greatest Show on Earth. I'm a strong atheist, a fan of Dawkins, and I greatly enjoyed that book, but it is rather harsh on the perspective of believers. If you're looking to convince someone of evolution, anti-theistic rhetoric will not get the job done. Instead, I'd suggest Coyne's Why Evolution is True, Shubin's Your Inner Fish or even Dawkins's The Selfish Gene.

I'd second this. Dawkins is a great writer, but his reputation might scare away theists if they have any idea of who he is.

 

[Stomatopoda]

I wouldn't recommend The Selfish Gene to most creationists, as it assumes the reader has a basic grasp on biology.

 

[I Ratant]

Many of the c-people do have a basic understanding of biology.
They have to, to abuse the terms the way they do.

 

[RationalVetMed]

Some of the incredulity people have about evolution is because it's very difficult/impossible for humans to rationally comprehend the time scales involved and just how massively long it can take for tiny changes to accumulate into major ones. Bill Bryson's 'A Short History of Nearly Everything' helped explain that side of things for me brilliantly.

Yuri

 

[UnrepentantSinner]

 

[Humes fork]

I thought maybe this short video could be useful to show to a creationist:



It's good old Sagan, no bashing of religion a la Dawkins and Coyne. But I think it could be considered offensive to a religious theist because Sagan dismisses the idea of design, on which theism rests. I'm starting to think this is unavoidable. The creationists rail against evolution precisely because it is so corrosive to the design hypothesis.

 

[Mehdimentio]

I recently finished Dawkins' "The Greatest Show on Earth - The Evidence For Evolution", which is specifically aimed at creationism and evolution denial in general. Dawkins is probably the best biology author out there, and this book wasn't an exception. If he really is interested in the truth of the matter, he shouldn't be able to put down this book without having had a shift in conviction. Go check it out.

 

[Mehdimentio]

Mendel did write to him, but Darwin apparently never read it.

That's a myth, if I recall it right. It stems from the false rumour that Darwin owned a copy of the German journal in which Mendel published his work. It's not even a sensible myth, given that the history of evolution would have been radically different from what it is if Darwin were to have a genetical understanding of his theory.

 

[digriz]

While I love Dawkins' work and would highly recommend "The God Delusion" and "Climbing Mount Improbable" I'm going to recommend a non science book.

"Misquoting Jesus"

First it's written by a Christian and should be a little less scary then Dawkins to other Christians.

Second it mainly focuses on how the English translation of the bible cannot nor should not be taken literally.

The author was a born again Christian and the more and more he studied the bible by learning Latin and ancient Greek the more he came to realize that the English translations that most people are always quoting is riddled with errors.

I think that if you can at least ease a creationist into the idea that the bible should not be taken literally that is at least a good start.

 

[luchog]

James Joyce's Ulysses; so they'll have something else to talk about for a change.

 

[Travis]

If we're going down that route I guess I could get him to read some Phillip K Dick. There's some weird stuff in those books on religion too.

 

[Travis]

While I love Dawkins' work and would highly recommend "The God Delusion" and "Climbing Mount Improbable" I'm going to recommend a non science book.

"Misquoting Jesus"

First it's written by a Christian and should be a little less scary then Dawkins to other Christians.

Second it mainly focuses on how the English translation of the bible cannot nor should not be taken literally.

The author was a born again Christian and the more and more he studied the bible by learning Latin and ancient Greek the more he came to realize that the English translations that most people are always quoting is riddled with errors.

I think that if you can at least ease a creationist into the idea that the bible should not be taken literally that is at least a good start.

Thanks for the suggestion.

Welcome to the forum.

 

[Gawdzilla Sama]

That's a myth, if I recall it right. It stems from the false rumour that Darwin owned a copy of the German journal in which Mendel published his work. It's not even a sensible myth, given that the history of evolution would have been radically different from what it is if Darwin were to have a genetical understanding of his theory.

As I understand it, Mendel wrote Darwin a letter about his theories, but Darwin never read it.

 

[not_so_new]

I thought maybe this short video could be useful to show to a creationist:



It's good old Sagan, no bashing of religion a la Dawkins and Coyne. But I think it could be considered offensive to a religious theist because Sagan dismisses the idea of design, on which theism rests. I'm starting to think this is unavoidable. The creationists rail against evolution precisely because it is so corrosive to the design hypothesis.

You know... when someone offers to read a book on a subject they already have a bias against you have to wonder if they are really going to read it.

It's easy to say you are going to be open minded but, honestly, if someone gave me a book about I.D. I wouldn't bother reading it. I have too much going on to read something I know isn't going to change my mind.

Call me close minded all you like but at least I am being honest.



Anyway, the point is, your friend might be better off just having him watch a video. It's short, to the point and could hold the I.D.'ers attention.

If I were to have him watch something I would probably start with the Sagan clip above for all the reasons Humes mentions. It goes without saying that Sagan ROCKS!

 

[quarky]

The case Against God

and
The Bad Popes are two favorites of mine.

There were some really bad Popes.

But really, the Teletubbies would be just as good.

 

[Mojo]

I really didn't come here intending to shoot down everyone else's ideas, but I'm not sure I would recommend Victorian prose written by the Father of All Lies himself to a home-schooled creationist, either.

How about Steve Jones's Almost like a Whale, which updates the Origin chapter by chapter?

 

[Mehdimentio]

As I understand it, Mendel wrote Darwin a letter about his theories, but Darwin never read it.

Do you have a source for this?

 

[Mojo]

Do you have a source for this?

There's nothing on the Darwin Correspondence Project website.

This page has two letters discussing whether there's any evidence from Darwin's papers and library that Darwin had a copy of Mendel's paper.

I can't see any mention of contact with Mendel in Janet Browne's biography of Darwin.

This implies that Mendel did not write to Darwin:

What a pity therefore that Darwin never got his hands on the paper and read it or that Mendel never wrote to Darwin and explained what he was up to.

 

[Captain Canada]

That's a hard one to read if you have no understanding of biology though =P I bought that for my mother for the same reason but she couldn't really read it, even if she was receptive to it.

I recommend "The Bible Unearthed"

This video makes it simple.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CW9G2YVtBYc&feature=related