0
Creation
Whether you believe God created the world or the universe is the result of the Big Bang, ask questions here about the creation of the beautiful and wondrous earth we live on.
2,055 Questions
No arguments; evidence.
1. The biochemical and genetic relatedness of all organisms on earth.
2. Biogeography. The distribution of organisms best explained by evolution.
3. Homology. The bones in your arm match almost bone for bone the bones in your dogs forelimb. ( save for structural modifications )
4. The age of the earth and the processes that took place over deep time. Well supported from many disiplines.
Why do scientists study proteins to find evidence for evolution?
Scientists study proteins to find evidence for evolution because proteins are essential molecules that carry out many functions in living organisms. By comparing the sequences of proteins across different species, scientists can uncover similarities and differences that provide clues about how different species are related and have evolved over time. This can help shed light on the evolutionary history and relationships between species.
What is a clever title for evolution v. creationism persuasive essay. I am for evolution?
Richard Dawkins battles the creationism and evolution landscape with many a lengthy book on the subjects or, presumably, clever article. The titles of his books are quite good, such as Climbing Mount Improbable or The Selfish Gene or River out of Eden or The Ancestor's Tale. I have no idea of any titles for you (obviously you can't use Dawkins' titles). I did once consider the title The Intelligent Design of Education, for an article on whether Intelligent Design was worthy to be taught alongside or instead of evolution in classes. The title was supposed to imply the 'intelligent design' of education and educational decrees in cases where they excluded such things as Intelligent Design and creationism. Of course, 'clever' titles on this topic are likely to amuse biologists and infuriate fundamentalists. On April the 1st of one year (probably a complete April Fool), it appeared that Scientific American (I think it was that) wrote an editorial saying things like we scientists should discard observation and experiment and embrace faith and creationism. One wonders how that went down. Still, as I say, a complete April Fool.
For your title, you can use plays on words, which are always clever. I sometimes rather like alliteration. Test your language. Look at the context and final product of your essay. Flip words this way and that. As I say, try puns and plays on words.
In a case where you defy or deny evolution, The Creation of Evolution could be the start of a title, followed by perhaps a derogatory ending that implies it incorrect or idiotic.
In the case in which you find holes in and dismiss creationism, try The Evolution of Creation, perhaps implying that creation is a made-up story that is imagined by creatures that are simply the product of evolution.
Oh well, good luck with your persuasive essay. Gather your facts well and good luck with the title.
Is Darwin's evolution or biblical creation true?
Darwin's theory of evolution is the theory that modern lifeforms have a common ancestry, and that they evolved from their ancestral forms through the mechanisms of reproductive variation and differential reproductive success.
While all the scientific data so far supports evolutionary theory as an accurate model, at least in its fundamental theses, and while most all of the world's scientists accept evolutionary theory as fundamentally accurate, many people still object to it based on religious grounds.
In the end, everybody will make their own determination.
Most religions have holy books that have different viewpoints and these have accounts which are different from each other. Something to keep in mind.
All evidence would seem to support evolutionary theory, while there is no testable model - and therefore no evidence - for the accuracy of the notion of creation.
How was the earth created according to evolution?
Evolution is not concerned with the creation of the earth. It explains how modern species developed from more primitive species of the past.
Cosmology explains how the earth was formed. At some stage, a supernova star exploded in the neighbourhood of our sun - within a few million light years from here. Supernovas are formed as giant stars die and are not entirely uncommon. And giant stars, because of their far greater mass, are able to convert their hydrogen into heavy elements before finally dying. Conversion of hydrogen into heavy elements is also well known to nuclear physicists. So, our supernova exploded and sent an enormous amount of heavy elements out into empty space. A very small part of this was captured in orbit around our sun, where it eventually concentrated into the various planets and other bodies that orbit the sun. One of these was, of course, the earth.
What evidence is there for creationism and the theory of evolution?
The evidence for creationism is in the Bible alone. Needless to say, a story written more than two thousand years ago is of limited value as evidence, even if millions believe it. It is such slender evidence that even creationists can not agree on what the story means, splitting into various camps, such as 'Old-Earth Creationism' and 'Young-Earth Creationism'. Apart from the Bible, creationists also fall back on speculation, philosophical arguments and pseudo-science.
The evidence for evolution is extensive, in spite of pseudo-scientific attempts to deny it:
- The fossil evidence, which now includes extensive evidence of transitional species
- The fact that fossils are consistently found in just the right layers in what is known as the geological column, except where there is clear evidence of geological disturbance
- The geographic distribution of fossils such that we never find related species anywhere that is inconsistent with evolution
- DNA evidence, that enables scientists to map the divergence of species from parent species
There is also the fact that almost all qualified scientists believe that the Theory of Evolution is a good explanation for the evolution of species. Claims about the Second Law of Thermodynamics and increasing entropy requiring there to have been a Creator simply demonstrate a lack of scientific knowledge. Similar comments can be made about pseudo-scientific claims that radio-isotope dating methods are extraordinarily unreliable, or that there is too little salt in the sea or too little helium in the atmosphere. A very brief summary of the problems with these claims:
- The Second Law of Thermodynamics applies only to closed systems. Species, and particularly individuals within a species, are not closed systems.
- Radio-isotope dating methods are self-confirming, because different radio-isotopes can be used to arrive at approximately the same age for a specimen.
- The rate at which salt is deposited in the sea by rainwater runoff has increased with increasing porosity of land surfaces. In the first period, before about three billion years ago, the land surface consisted largely of hard, igneous rock, from which little salt leached. Now that porous soils and secondary rocks cover much of the earth's land surface, salt leaching is naturally greater. Young-Earth Creationist claims assume that scientists believe this rate has never altered. In addition to the increase in salt leaching, land upheavals have returned some salt from the seas back on to the land.
- Helium is a light element that gradually escapes from the upper atmosphere into outer space. Radioactivity replenishes the helium in the atmosphere, but this is balanced by atmospheric losses.
Is earth a prison for mankind until the end of days?
I believe it is & created specifically for this purpose.
Its the only planet in the universe with an atmosphere that can sustain us. A mere pinprick in the carpet of space.. Travelling round our sun at exactly the right distance. If we any closer?, we would burn. Any further away? we would freeze..
Totally Perfect!.. or is it?.
If you are religious and believe in God or Supreme Being, then you may also believe in reincarnation? so if man done enough to be accepted into heaven, there`s a good chance be incarnated until he does.. I believe this opportunity is time limited though and this opportunity will very soon come to an end. The fact we are all still here means, we havent done enough to be accepted back into heaven.
If you look up from earth? you see heaven so, where is hell?
It cant be down below because that would suggest it must be earth.. So? If we haven`t done enough to be accepted back into heaven by the end of days, hell may well be on earth..
How many creationists are there in the world?
It is difficult to estimate the exact number of creationists in the world as beliefs vary across different religions and individuals. Creationism is predominantly found among religious groups that adhere to literal interpretations of their religious texts, such as the Bible or Quran, and reject the theory of evolution. Studies suggest that a significant portion of the global population holds creationist beliefs to varying degrees.
What are the mechanism evolution called?
The mechanisms of evolution are called natural selection, genetic drift, gene flow, and mutation. These mechanisms work together to drive changes in populations over time, leading to the diversity of life we see today.
What theory proposes that evolution occurs steadily in tiny changes over long periods of time?
The theory that proposes evolution occurs steadily in tiny changes over long periods of time is gradualism. This idea suggests that species evolve slowly and continuously through small, incremental changes rather than through sudden, dramatic shifts.
DNA provides greater stability and accuracy in storing genetic information compared to RNA. This makes DNA less prone to errors and mutations, allowing for more efficient replication and inheritance of genetic material. This likely led to the switch to DNA-based genetic systems during evolution on Earth.
How does the second creation story agree with modern scientific study?
It is hard to see any connection between either biblical creation story and modern scientific knowledge. The idea that God created a male person long before he created a female of the same species is scientifically absurd. In Genesis chapter 2, God created Adam then the beasts of the field, yet scientists know that humans were among the last creatures to evolve. The Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil, and the Tree of Life have no scientific explanation, although they serve a literary purpose as allegories.
How does evolution involve creationism?
Evolution does NOT involve creationism.
- Evolution is a testable and therefore provable explanation as to how the diversity of life on earth has happened.
- Creationism is a religious viewpoint and therefore a mater of faith.
Answer
I agree with the above. Evolution does NOT involve Creationism. Evolution is a branch of biological science and thus rejects "supernatural" claims such as those of Creationism, does not need to consider them. Creationism, often hanging on Genesis, the first book of the Bible, predates scientific inquiry and the scientific method and so is thus rejected by science and thus evolutionary science. In the public spotlight, the so-called Evolution-Creation "controversy" and all the on-stage arguments and debates might make it seem as though Evolution and Creationism (and Intelligent Design) have a lot to do with one another, but I doubt Creationism gets much mention at all in scientific laboratories and scientific conferences (it can't because it hasn't got anything to say about the real world.)
Why is ther little evidence for the evolution of early life forms?
Because of the lack of hard parts. Geological upheaval (this affects all fossils to a certain degree ). To name two reasons that are supported by the evidence. It also hinges on what you mean as " little. " The evidence, by way of analogy, would convict a saint of murder. It is strong enough for that and strong enough to support evolutionary theory
How does Darwin's theory of evolution differ from what scientist believe today?
Darwin's theory of evolution as proposed in "On the Origin of Species" does not differ from what scientists have discovered. The ongoing work still proves the theory today.
Bearing in mind that Darwin, and all others, did not know anything about genetics at the time he was writing, it is remarkable that he was able to propose the theory along with Alfred Russel Wallace at the time.
How does Charles Darwin's Theory of evolution differ from what scientists believe today?
Very little, considering that genes and DNA were completely unknown in those days.
The only serious difference between Darwin's Theory and what scientists know today was that Darwin made several logical jumps in terms of how traits were passed from parent to offspring and had no idea about the historical record of fossils. Incorporating genetics and fossils into the study of evolution has allowed scientists to clearly explain how x became y using records and analyses unavailable to Darwin at the time.
Why did people not believe Charles Darwin's theory of evolution?
Charles Darwin was active around the 1850s. This was a time that education was on the uprise, but it was not really commonplace. Many people were active in church, and that is where they learned most of their views about life and creation. The church was also very active in selecting the school's curriculum, for those that did receive some education. Without a broader understanding of the world around them, it was difficult for them to accept anything outside of their church teaching. Darwin's theories were rejected by many on the basis of religious beliefs.
Through the years, education became more prevalent, and many church goers were able to reconcile some science with some of their beliefs. The ideals of religion and the theories of evolution have both developed through the years. Some of Darwin's ideas have been rejected by evolutionists, whereas some others have been accepted by creationists. Although not all of his theories stood the test of time, he was a pioneer in his field, and he started many scientist thinking about new and different possibilities.
Very slowly. Each generation has some differences from the preceding generations. The survivors from one generation pass their genes on to subsequent ones. A trait that increases survival rate is passed on more frequently than a trait which is detrimental to procreation.
What was the energy source for the creation of the earth?
There are two answers for this question and both are theoretical. The first answer comes from religious dogma and is simply: God. This answer is infinitely more simple to give for the question, if not prove. Nearly every known religion on Earth accounts for the creation of Earth in the same way as it is written in the first verse of the Christian bible, "In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth."
The second answer to this question comes from scientific approach and has undergone an immeasurable amount of hypothesis, research, testing, and critical scrutiny over the years. Science tells us that, in the beginning, there was only a single super-massive gaseous point in our empty universe. Instantaneously and randomly, the gravitational bond holding this massive body together exploded and super-heated particles were projected outward through space, in a reaction called the "Big Bang". In less than one millionth of a second, protons, neutrons, electrons, and their anti-particles began to form as they traveled outward. As time passed, atoms were formed. These early atoms were joined together through gravitational force. The gravitational force of these early formations was so great that they collapsed in on themselves, and as hydrogen atoms bonded with one another, stars were formed through the reaction of fusion. Over millions of years, the fusion process completed its cycle for these early stars and they exploded, throwing out massive atoms into the universe. Over time, these atoms collected and combined to create planets, smaller stars, asteroids, and numerous other solid bodies.
As stars began to form in our galaxy, one appeared where our Sun now takes residence. After this first star burned through its usable hydrogen and other elements, it exploded, sending matter outward in all directions. Through gravitational forces, this matter cooled and collected in a few key locations, forming the planets in our solar system and the asteroid belt. While all of this was taking place, a smaller star began to form in the same location of the previous explosion and our Sun was born, starting its own fusion process.
The Earth was one of the planets formed from the collapse of the first star and it has taken billions of years to become the ideal home for life as we know it to be today.
How does scientists use genetics to understand evolution?
Scientists use genetics to understand evolution by studying the changes in DNA sequences over time in different species. By comparing genetic similarities and differences between species, researchers can infer evolutionary relationships and timelines. This information helps scientists to reconstruct the history of life on Earth and understand how populations change and evolve.
How would you use evolution in a sentence?
The process of things changing gradually over time is known as evolution.
Why is creationism so controversial?
The purpose of creationism is to create controversy. In fact, without controversy, creationism would cease to exist.
Creationism evolved as a group of related, but sometimes highly inconsistent concepts that its proponents hoped would be taught in schools alongside science, and thereby bolster literal belief in the biblical creation stories. The concern was that, as the Theory of Evolution became more and more widely accepted, not only in the scientific community, but in general society, people would begin to see the biblical creation stories as allegories rather than as history. And the fear was that if people no longer believed the biblical creation stories, they would cease to be Christians.
Major denominations say that creationism is not central to Christian faith, and scientists say that creationism is not scientifically valid. So, creationism needs controversy in order to be noticed.
For more information, please visit: http://christianity.answers.com/theology/the-story-of-creation
What are some of the main points of Darwin's thoery of evolution?
Charles Darwin's theory of evolution as published in his book On the Origin of Species states that all organisms on earth develop through the process of natural selection. Small variations from one generation to the next increase an individual's ability to compete for resource, mates, and general survival.
What is the creation of a new species called?
The creation of a new species is called speciation. This process occurs when populations of a species become reproductively isolated and diverge over time, leading to the formation of distinct species.
With special creation, we should find species distributed in an effectively random geographic manner, with closely related species no more likely to be located close to each other than not, but merely existing where climate and other environmental factors favoured their survival. It would make as much if not more sense for them to exist wherever an environment could support them, as opposed to being distributed according to their apparent relationship to other life forms. The fact that this is not the case contradicts the claims of creationists.
Comparative anatomy
One of the strongest forms of evidence against special creation is comparative anatomy. Organisms with similar anatomical features are assumed to be relatively closely related evolutionarily, and they are assumed to share a common ancestor. Common ancestry is a paradox if species have remained unchanged since the time of creation.
Some organisms have homologous anatomical structures that are very similar in embryological development and form, but very different in function. A good example of homologous structures is the forelimb of mammals. When examined closely, the forelimbs of humans, whales, dogs, and bats are all very similar in structure - each possesses the same number of bones, arranged in almost the same way. By comparing the anatomy of these organisms, scientists have determined that they share a common evolutionary ancestor and in an evolutionary sense, they are relatively closely related. Their dramatic differences in function is clear evidence of adaptation through continuing evolution, not of special creation.
Other organisms have analogous anatomical structures that function in very similar ways, but are morphologically and developmentally very different. For example, the wings of birds and dragonflies both serve the same function, but the anatomy of the wings are very different. Since these structures are so different, even though they have the same function, they do not indicate an evolutionary relationship nor that two species share a common ancestor.
