answersLogoWhite

0


Best Answer

The primary difference between Darwin's and Lamarck's approaches to evolution (if I remember correctly) was that Darwin believed that evolution operated primarily through breeding and death: members of a species that have unproductive characteristics tend to die early and have less opportunity to produce offspring, and so their characteristics are not passed on to future generations. Lamarck, by contrast, thought that environmental conditions could exert a direct (if slight) influence on the genome, so that parents would tend to produce offspring that were better suited to the environment they lived in. For example, Darwin would explain the thick fur and subcutaneous fat deposits of cold-climate animals by saying that members of the species with less fur and fat would die more easily and earlier in cold weather; Lamarck would explain the same result by saying that the cold climate induced the organisms to produce more fur and fat, and their offspring would be born with a greater capacity to produce those things than their parents. Lamarck's theory has not been disproved - scientists still do not have a clear understanding of the process of evolution - but for various non-scientific reasons it is less accepted in the scientific community (primarily, I think, because it opens the door to a teleological argument abut the nature of species that most scientists find distasteful). It is important to point out that Darwin's theory was that of Natural Selection and The Origin of Species, and he was not proposing any system separate from or one that discredited classical Creationist theory. Jean-Baptiste Lamarck, however, coined the phrase Evolution.

User Avatar

Wiki User

11y ago
This answer is:
User Avatar
More answers
User Avatar

Wiki User

13y ago

Darwin accept that organism, including bacteria, are always changing.

This answer is:
User Avatar

User Avatar

Wiki User

14y ago

They both attempted to explain the same phenomena by natural means. Both theories also used inheritence of parental characteristics to explain how species might evolve.

This answer is:
User Avatar

User Avatar

Wiki User

13y ago

They both propose that organisms are not immutable, but changes over time. However the mechanisms of the two theories are very different.

This answer is:
User Avatar

Add your answer:

Earn +20 pts
Q: How is Darwin's theory of Evolution and Lamarck's theory of Evolution alike?
Write your answer...
Submit
Still have questions?
magnify glass
imp
Related questions

How is Darwin's theory and evolution alike with the flood myth?

Not at all alike. Evolution is an observed and observable fact. The theory that explains much about evolution is well supported by the evidence and has been repeatedly tested. It also has made many testable predictions. Flood myth? Whose flood myth? These myths are legion and many cultures have one. Not one of the myths has ever been supported by the evidence though.


How do you use convergent evolution in a sentence?

Convergent evolution means that different species have evolved to do the same sort of thing. Those two animals show convergent evolution. Convergent evolution explains why they look so much alike.


Related organisms become less alike by preditation adaptation convergent evolution or divergent evolution?

Divergent evolution.


When two organisims look alike?

Convergent evolution.


When two unrelated organisims look alike?

Convergent evolution.


Who is the evolve of phion?

Phione does not have an evolution it is a rare. P.S. the closest thing to an evolution would be Manaphy, they look alike.


How are law and theory alike?

they both can be changed in time.


Term when two unrelated organisms look alike?

It's called convergent evolution.


What evidence of common anserty and diversity realets to human evolution?

Fossils If they look alike


Which section is not part of the cell theory?

cells are alike in structure and composition


How is a hypothesis and a theory alike?

Both a hypothesis and a theory offer an explanation of some observed phenomenon. The difference is that a hypothesis must have confirmation to become a theory.


Are there really seven persons who look alike on earth?

That's what they say, but that theory has yet to be proven.