I'll vote for the Gould and Wilson suggestions particularly. Asimov wrote
some excellent essays as well. Dawkins mostly ignores the molecular
evidence, preferring his own version of rabid Darwinism, shellfish genes.
For a more lucid molecular discussion, check out Lynn Margulis, the
Journal BioSystems. Or for a more daring discussion of the modern human
evidence, Elaine Morgan. =:^o
A note on atheism: the original definition was someone whose god had
forsaken them, not the more modern (politically correct) bassackwards
interpretation. Early Christians were forsaken by the god of Judaism,
remember.
see also, :"The Neuropsychological Bases of God Beliefs," by Michael
Persinger.
"Whatever I am, I am not a Marxist"
-Karl Marx.
nor I an atheist.
