Reddit mentions of Your Inner Fish: A Journey into the 3.5-Billion-Year History of the Human Body

I present to you, the Tiktaalik.

I don't have time to answer your question properly but check out your local library or purchase Neil Shubin's Your Inner Fish which will help you achieve a proper understanding of this topic.

You still have your gills. They just turned into mammalian jaws and ear bones, that's all. If its any consolation, you had gills when you were an embryo for a short time.

Read Your Inner Fish by Neil Shubin for lots more on our fishy ancestry.

> as I have no proof that we evolved from other animals/etc.

Such proof abounds. If you're going to debate these people, you need to know some of it.

I don't mean enough to ask a couple of questions, I mean enough to carry both sides of the conversation, because he'll make you do all the heavy lifting.

Start with talkorigins.org.

First, the FAQ
Maybe the 29+ Evidences for Macroevolution next,
then the pieces on observed instances of speciation

See the extensive FAQs index

Here are their questions for creationsists - see both links there

and then read the index to creationist claims

That's just to start. Take a look at the Outline (which starts with an outline of the outline!)

If you're going to talk with a creationist, you either need to get some idea of the topography or you'll end up chasing in circles around the same tree again and again.

Yes, it looks like a major time investment, but once you start to become familiar with it, it gets easier quickly. Don't aim to learn it all by heart - but you should know when there is an answer to a question, and where to find it.

read books like Your Inner Fish and Why Evolution Is True and The Greatest Show on Earth

I list Your Inner Fish first because it tells a great story about how Shubin and his colleagues used evolutionary theory and geology to predict where they should look for an intermediate fossil linking ancient fish and amphibians (a "transitional form") - and they went to that location, and found just such a fossil. This makes a great question for your creationist - given fossils are kind of rare, how the heck did he manage that? If evolution by natural selection is false, why does that kind of scientific prediction WORK? Is God a deceiver, trying to make it look exactly like evolution happens?? Or maybe, just maybe, the simpler explanation is true - that evolution actually occurs. (Then point out that many major Christian churches officially endorse evolution. They understand that the evidence is clear)

It's a good idea to read blogs like Panda's Thumb, Why Evolution Is True, Pharyngula, erv (old posts here) and so on, which regularly blog on new research that relates to evolution.

Make sure you know about the experiments by Lenski et al on evolution of new genes

Don't take "no proof" as an argument. The evidence is overwhelming.

Your Inner Fish is a fascinating book on the evolution of the human body.

I did not see him try to shut you up. He tried to clarify your question and then suggested where an answer had already been given.

If you are genuinely interested in the thinking behind the theory, rather than just being rude to those you disagree with, I suggest reading "Your Inner Fish" by Neil Shubin, the discoverer of the Tiktaalik fossil. It is a well written accessible account of how the fossil record and our physiology show a clear evolutionary route from earlier body plans such as fish to the body plan of mammals (including humans). He is especially good on this point of how we have inherited this strange wiring plan for our nerves.

Read it if you like. Then try and take apart the actual detailed argument rather than attacking a snapshot from a TV show.

In Your Inner Fish -- one of the best general audience science books I've read in a year or more --author Neil Shubin describes how he and his team predicted where a particular "transitional" fossil might be found, travelled there, and indeed found the fossils they were looking for. It's an interesting story, and the book as a whole is excellent at not only explaining evolution from various perspectives but fostering a sense of connection with all life (well, that's how it struck me, anyway).

OP, please suggest this book to them, it is an excellent introduction to skepticism.

In light of their creationist tract, you could also consider Your Inner Fish.

Go read Neil Shubin's Your Inner Fish. It's a great story how he helped discover Tiktaalik exactly where they predicted it would be. He also does a tremendous job at explaining transitional fossils and vestigial organs.

Evolution is just a theory... by defintion, you can't really refute that.

http://www.amazon.com/Your-Inner-Fish-Journey-3-5-Billion-Year/dp/0375424474

However, I strongly encourage every person who really wants to argue about the proof of evolution with someone to read this book... it's amazing.

Follow that up with Your Inner Fish by Neil Shubin.

You should pick up a copy of Your Inner Fish by Neil Shubin, the guy who found Tiktaalik.

It's a fantastic read.

EDIT: What the fuck, no Velociraptor or Archaeopteryx? Tiktaalik is new, and super-transitional and all, but unless your a paleoichthyologist or something, I fail to see how it garners "Best Extinct Vertebrate".

If you can't tell her yourself, let Neil Shubin do it in one of my favorite books, Your Inner Fish: A Journey into the 3.5-Billion-Year History of the Human Body. This book talks about said "missing links" and about Tiktaalik, the missing link between fish and amphibians. He talks about the genetic similarities between every living vertebrate, but explained very well for scientists, but also put very simply for people who don't fully understand all the terminology. He talks about fossils, and he talks about his own personal experience and makes it a very fun read. He also talks about experiments that have been done to stop genes from expressing or forcing them to express to see what will happen as a result, and have even gone as far as to take genes from chickens and replace them with shark counterparts to see the results. Very surprising, very interesting, and most certainly an extremely worth-while read, especially for a creationist.

Also, I simply don't understand how she could be studying micro and/or medicine and deny evolution when evolution is the basis of micro. Ask her what she thinks of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) which is essentially staphylococci which have adapted as a response to antibiotics to become resistant to antibiotic treatments. Ask her what she thinks of the AIDS virus (or any retro-virus at that) and why we can't cure it. Or ask her why there is no cure for the flu, and why vaccines for the flu only work for the strain that effects us that year. Ask her what a strain is, if it's not an evolved or adapted form of a different strain. Ask her where H1N1 (swine flu) came from and what is the difference between H1N5 (bird flu).

You can literally observe mutation and evolution over only a few generations in micro. Viruses in particular, and since they replicate so fast and so frequently and in such great numbers, the chances of mutation increases, and a bunch of mutations increase the chance of one of them being viable and successful. AIDS mutates so quickly that it changes entirely throughout your body before anything can be created to cure it.

I saw another commenter linked to talkorigins.org. Check that it, it is an invaluable resource.

This will make up for that day.

1. What? I never said that "religion is taught more in school than evolution." I said that without an educational standard - which Ron Paul wants (govt out of everything) - many schools would choose to teach creationism. I live in Texas so hear about the board of education trying to add creationism into the textbooks pretty often. Many members who run for the board do so on a platform of inserting ID into the classroom. I never mentioned the pledge. And I don't know what you mean by the first sentence.
   
   
2. How much have you studied evolution? Do you understand evolution? Try reading one of these books,
   
   

• Your Inner Fish
  
• Remarkable Creatures
  
• The Greatest Show on Earth
  
  

3. Parents and teachers can be dumb. Experts should be writing the books and determining the material - with input from parents and teachers on what to focus on and how to present it - especially in technically difficult areas like evolution. In Texas this is a big concern because intelligent design (i.e. creationism) is taught in some science classes. Anyway, my point is that science class should be for science only and creationism has no place in it at all and neither should anything without scientific evidence backing it up. I almost don't even want to argue this because even acknowledging creationism with evolution raises it up to a status is doesn't deserve. Creationism is anti-science. And really, I don't mind studying religion in other contexts. I was taught the tenants and beliefs of religions in one of my classes and found it very informative. Analyzing the stories sounds more like it should stay in Bible Study though.
   
   
4. Have you never heard of the Scopes Trial which challenged a law that made teaching of evolution illegal? I never said Dr. Paul would force creationism into public schools. I said he implicitly supports the teaching of creationism in public schools by taking a hands off approach. By holding the schools accountable to parents, you're going to get a lot more bad science taught in schools. Even you should see that some standards should be set so that we don't teach kids incorrect facts.
   

If you've never read this book, you definitely should.

http://www.amazon.com/Your-Inner-Fish-Journey-3-5-Billion-Year/dp/0375424474

http://www.amazon.com/Your-Inner-Fish-Journey-3-5-Billion-Year/dp/0375424474