Comment on the validity of the expression "Theory of Evolution" vs. "Law of Evolution". As a guideline try to discuss this topic too: has there ever been a documented case that contradicts the notion of evolution? Remember to substantiate your opinion with citations from reputable sources.
Alexa Gonzalez
ReplyDeleteHonors Biology
Period 2
Many people today debate whether the "Theory of Evolution" is just a theory or an actual law. The term evolution means a process of change. Biologists use the word evolution to mean a generation-to-generation change in the proportion of different inherited genes in a population. Today, the government contradicts the notion of evolution because they feel that the theory of evolution is not to be taught as a law for the different beliefs that people have. There have been court trials in several states contradicting about whether to have teachers teach about evolution. They are fighting against teaching this material for the reason that there might be problem in the beliefs that people have. For example, in Arkansas there was a court trial that spoke of whether this type of material should be taught. All this information traces back to Darwin's theory of evolution which states that if any species is able to survive in its environment then it has been chosen by nature to live on and keep producing its population. This is what we call natural selection because nature is being the judge whether this type of species should stay or go. This course of evolution happens everyday which is why it is much more a law then a theory.
Citations:
http://www.nsf.gov/index.jsp
http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=15294019960718746276&q=theory+of+evolution+vs.+law+of+evolution&hl=en&as_sdt=40003
Kyra Reifenberg
ReplyDeleteP.4
Honors Bio.
The theory of evolution is that living organisims adapt to thier enviroment. The Law of evolution fallows natural selection which is when the weak die and the strong surrvive. But not all things fallow evolution such as the giraffe.
“But, the giraffe’s neck is so long that major body modifications were required during the (supposed) evolution from short-necked okapi like animals. Let us assume,that the giraffe did evolve by chance processes over time. In order for the giraffe’s neck to lengthen, the heart would need to be able to pump harder in order to push blood up the neck to the brain. This heart would need to evolve at the same time with the neck in order for the giraffe to survive. The giraffe might bend down at one point. The giraffe would spread its forelegs and bend its neck below body level. The blood should rush to its head,the giraffe’s heart is so large and powerful that it normally would shoot alot of blood into the brain, causing a fatal increase of blood pressure in the giraffe’s head. This does not happen, though, because of specialized valves contained within the vessels of the giraffe’s neck. These valves work to block the blood being pumped to the brain while it is bent down." In my oppinion this contradicts evolution.
Citation
Nelson, N. (2004). What Giraffes will do for a drink. Retrieved from http://www.apologeticspress.org/articles/2535
I think the term "theory of evolution" is correct and should be used rather than "law of evolution" because "law of evolution" is just a hypothesis, something we believe to be true the more evidence we collect. Yet, it might not be true as there are other theories with their own respectable amount of proof. Therefor, the concept of evolution should not be considered a law for we don't know with absolute certainty that it is true.
ReplyDeleteAdditionally, there are many holes in the concept of evolution. No one has proven it to be a fact and there is plenty of evidence supporting other theories like creationism. That is why it should not be considered a law. Truth is, many people make their decision about the origin of life without being fully informed. To be able to make any decision, whether it be the theory of evolution or creationism or anything else, one must have a more or less complete idea of what each theory proposes and all of the evidence supporting each. Sadly, many make their decision without being fully informed.
Personally, I believe in creationism. There have been many cases where the theory of evolution could not provide an answer. Many scientist use the fossil registry as proof for the theory of evolution, that all life forms came from a common past(anfibians came from fish, mammals came from reptiles,...). Paleantologist David M. Raup said that instead of finding a gradual development of life, what Darwin's contemporary geologist and geologist in actuality are finding is a very irregular registry. The species appear very abruptly in the sequence and show small or no change during its existence in the registry and then suddenly dissapear.(1) The truth is the inmense mayority of fossils show great stability in types of species thoughout extensive periods of time. They do not indicate that one species evolved into a new one.
They also say that mutations provide the base for the creation of new species. In late 1930s a group of scientist attempted artificial natural selection through mutations. Scientist in the U.S., Europe and Asia worked on this and four decades later they still did not have the desired results. Wolf-Ekkehard Lonnig, scientist in the Max Planck Institute in Germany concluded that mutations cannot transform an original species into a completely new one. This conclusion is based on the results of all the experiments and studies about mutations made in the XX century and with the laws of probability. (2)
Likewise, natural selection cannot lead to the creaion of new species. In 1999, evolution theorist Jeffrey H. Schwartz wrote that natural selection helps species adapt to the changing demands of the environment, but in no case creates something new.(3) This is harmonios with the conclusions made by scientist from the study of Darwin's Galapagos' finches in the 1970s by Peter and Rosemary Grant from Princeton University.(4)
Bibliography
(1)Raup, David M..:"Conficts Between Darwin ad Paleontology", Field Museum of Natural Historu Bulletin(jan. 1979), p.23
(2)Lonnig, Wolf-Ekkehard:Mutation Breeding, Evolution, and the Law of Recurrent Variation, 2005, p. 48-51
(3)Schwartz, Jeffrey H.:Sudden Origins-Fossils, Genes, and the Emergence of Species, 1999, p. 317-320
(4) Grant, Peter R.:"Natural Selection and Darwin's Finches", Scientific American (Oct. 1991) p. 87
5. http://anthro.palomar.edu/evolve/evolve_2.htm
6.http://learn.genetics.utah.edu/archive/mutations/index.html
Olivia Azadikhah
ReplyDeletePeriod 2
Dr. Ochatt
9/7/10
On one website I found that "Law of Evolution" is indeed a law because there is validity in the fact that we are passed different genes from our parents and our body is adapting to circumstances that are happening today. On the website that I was on it shows different diagrams to show how adaptation works. Looking through their website I found that it completely makes sense. So in my opinion it is the "Law of Evolution" not the "Theory of Evolution".
http://www.theoryofevolution.net/blog/
On another website I found it is the “Theory of Evolution” no the “Law of Evolution”. Instead of organisms adapting to a new environment, silent genes that we were already carrying to begin with are just coming out to show themselves. They are triggered on randomly, and they are merely influencing other genes to do other things.
http://blog.silentgenetheory.com/
In 1925 John Thomas Scopes, a biology teacher in Dayton, Tennessee, was arrested for violating the butler act, which prohibited the teaching of evolution in schools. The American Civil Liberties Union decided to take up the case and America's most famous criminal lawyer,Clarence Darrow, who offered to defend Scopes without a fee.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/USAscopes.htm
Evolution the theory of life and it's creation and develoment since the first homind.Evolution is not true the information used to prove it is contradicting it more than supporting it.The biggest problem that the theory of evolution faces is true problem of the missing link.Hundreds if not thousands of fossils have been found on organisms that seen to have the same characteristics as the common homospapien today.The gap is that the fossils show large changes in structure but no gradual or continuous changes leading up to that characteristic.the more fossils found the more gaps neede to be filled.Saying that evolution is shown by the fossils is like saying that a tree can be a tree with individual twigs but without any branches connecting them.Scientists have found thousands of protons that make up a human body and still find no real likeness or similarities in a human connecting it to a Neanderthal or homo erectus. This shows that there is no real solid proof to state that the theory of evolution is a fact ,but historians still go forward with placing an unproven theory in history text books as if true. The othe problem is that how can a species evolve if there was no organism in the first place that a molecule or microbacteria just magical come together forming an organism what is the real reason that these microorganisms came together to form a larger organisms?scientist can truly prove that question so the theory of evolution is still theory and not fact. Robert Locke (n.d.).The Scientific Case Against Evolution A Review of Michael Denton's Evolution: A Theory in Crisis & Michael J. Behe's Darwin's Black Box.Retrieved September 7,2010 from http://www.godandscience.org/evolution/locke.html
ReplyDeleteEnmanuel Espinales
ReplyDelete9/7/10
Period 2
Honors Bio
There is a great difference between the terms "theory" and "law." To me a theory is a general idea that can be supported by observations but doesnt have the concrete evidence to make it true. And a law is a proven concept that has been proven and is accepted throught out the scientific community and there is irrefusable evidence that makes it true. I believe that the community should use the "Theory of Evolution", but it all comes down to each individual's own perception.
http://mall.turnpike.net/C/cs/theory.htm
Maryann Rodriguez
ReplyDeletep.4
Dr.O
Bio Honors 1
9/7/10
The law of evolution is the fact that things evolve over time such as adaptation. Scientific studies have proved this to be true therefore it’s a fact which makes it a law. Meanwhile the theory of evolution tries to explain facts or the law of evolution it is still only a theory because it has not been scientifically proven. Some people however say that the second law of Thermodynamics is evidence against evolution, this law states that over time things decrease in order and complexity, or they undergo progressive degradation. Meanwhile evolution states that over a long period of time simple systems transform into complex systems.
Citations:
http://www.gennet.org/facts/metro03.html
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/evolution-fact.html
Ash.mon@mail.com is Ashner Solomon honors biology period 4
ReplyDeleteLaw of Evolution simply refers to all the changes in traits that species over go due to adaptation, natural selection, etc, while Theory of Evolution refers to the reason these changes occurs. The expression Theory of Evolution would be considered a more valid expression, since Evolution is considered a scientific theory. There have been cases that contradict the notion of evolution, for example, in the early 1900's, teaching evolution was illegal, which led to the Scopes trial of 1920, where a teacher was charged for teaching evolution. This led a great debate on whether it should be considered right to teach evolution, and whether evolution was an acceptable explanation.
ReplyDeleteAmanda Zakka
ReplyDelete9.7.10
Period 4
Charles Darwin came up with the theory of evolution. His theory is based on 5 key inferences and observations. The 5 inferences and observations are
1. Variation: There is variation in every population.
2. Competition: Organisms compete for limited resources.
3. Genetics: Organisms pass Genetic traits to their offspring.
4. Offspring: Organisms produce more offspring than can survive.
5. Natural selection: The organisms with the most beneficial traits are more likely to survive and reproduce.
The first law of evolution states that the world is changing. It states that we don't change rather we come from a common ancestor. The second law says that species are descended from one common ancestor. The third law of evolution states that from one species it will split off and form new ones. The fourth law of evolution is gradualism. This states that populations gradually change over time rather than new individuals randomly showing up. The fifth law is natural selection where some offspring are better than others.
Darwin had made many laws that were proven to be right, which is why they aren't theories anymore, they have become laws.
Sources:http://www.spaceandmotion.com/Charles-Darwin-Theory-Evolution.htm
http://www.rattlesnake.com/notions/evolution
Darwin's theory of evolution states that all life is related to eachother and has evolved from a common ancestor. A scientist named Ernst Mayr said that Darwin's notion has five parts to it. Darwin's five laws are: Evolution as such, the theory that the Earth is never constant, it is always changing and the life on it always changes too; common descent, this is the understanding that all living things on Earth evolved from the same ancestry; gradualism, this means that graudal changes are made throughout generations of species; multiplication of species, this is a law that says that species either split to form new populations; and Natural selection. Natural selection means that over a period of time, a species' genes have changed. They keep the genes that help them survive and reproduce and pass them on to the next generation. Some people are now saying that Darwin's theory has been experimented and is completely true so it should be refered to as the "Law of Evolution" not the "Theory of evoltion".
ReplyDeleteCitation:
http://www.darwins-theory-of-evolution.com/
http://www.rattlesnake.com/notions/evolution.ht
ml
Katherine Glickman
ReplyDeletePeriod 2nd
Both the theory of evolution and the law of evolution are based on scientist's and researcher's own thought-out processes. All you need to do is to support your theory with facts and evidence to create it as a law. But how are scientist and researcher's suppose to gather up information to back up a theory that may have once existed millions of years ago? This is the reason of people's other opinions on evolution because no matter how you know or how you find out, there will always be questions and you wont always have the answers.
Of course there has been contradicted document cases on evolution because it's such a debatable discussion. There is never a solid answer or conclusion to evolution, just guesses.
http://mall.turnpike.net/C/cs/theory.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolution (Paragraph: History of evolutionary thought)
Jocelyne Perez
ReplyDeletePeriod 4
Honors Biology
In this article, it says that there are two different sides to evolution. One side focuses whether or not humans have evolved from earlier organisms. Another side talks about how evolution actually began. It says that biologists say that biological evolution is a fact. They do say that we have evolved from an earlier organism. How evolution happened is a theory.
Citation:
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/evolution-fact.html
Joseph Abinader
ReplyDeleteMrs. O
p.4
Honors bio
Contrasting the theory of evolution and the law of evolution.
To say the law of evolution is proposing that it is fact. The theory of evolution on the other hand is an educated guess and or a hypothesis as Stephen J. Gould has put this as well as anyone else: In the American vernacular, "theory" often means "imperfect fact" on the other hand "fact" does not mean "absolute certainty." The final proofs are in logic and mathematics and they achieve certainty only because they are not about the empirical world. Evolution as a process that has always gone on in the history of the earth can be doubted only by those who are ignorant and are resistant to evidence. By contrast, the mechanisms that bring evolution about certainly need study and clarification.
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/evolution-fact.html
http://www.stephenjaygould.org/library/gould_fact-and-theory.html
Alexander Lozana
ReplyDeletePd.2 HBIO
9/7/2010
Although their are no scientific documents stating anything against the theory of evolution, there are other historical/religious writings that prove otherwise, such as the Bible. in any religion, a bible will never agree with darwinism or atheism, as none of these believe in a Creator or higher power. "In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth" is what is STATED in genesis 1:1 in the Bible, as the THEORY of evolution states that we adapted and evolved from primates due to natural selection. I personally have religious views, and therefore disagree with the theory of evolution, but everyone is entitled to their own opinions and beliefs
Santiago Gambino
ReplyDeletePeriod 2
The term evolution means a process of change. It also means a generation-to-generation change in the proportion of different inherited genes in a population. Organisms evolved in order to survive and adapt to new environments. I concur with the statement "Law of Evolution". In all of the studies since the year that the theory of evolution was created there has been no document case that contradicts with the theory. in every experiment and observation it shows that we have evolved from ape-like organisms and that other organisms also evolved over time. For example, light beetles that live in the dirt are easily spotted by predators and will die. The beetles that remained and those who have a darker skin will evolve their skin color in order to blend in with the dirt. This will help them to hid from predators and survive. Therefore the statement "Law of Evolution" can be used to replace the "Theory of Evolution". If there is no contradicting information then the theory can be proven true as a fact, a law.
http://www.bearfabrique.org/evolution/evolution.html
http://mall.turnpike.net/C/cs/theory.htm
Bryan Ibarra
ReplyDeleteP7 HBIO
There are two important questions that biologists and non-biologists have asked: whether or not modern organisms have evolved from older ancestral organisms and whether modern species are continuing to change over time. This also leads to the question:"what are the exact mechanics of evolution"?
Evelution poses as a theory AND a fact. However, these two terms (theory, fact) are different from eachother. A theory is a structure of ideas created to explain or interpret a given fact. A fact is the data of the universe given to us in an easy and understandable way. However, not all facts are one hundred percent true.
The theory of evolution is actually just created to explain or interpret the mechanics of evolution, while the law (or fact) of evolution is that of which already occurred. It is broken up into two parts.
References:
Madisen Liebl
ReplyDeleteSeptember 7, 2010
Period 2
Darwin had 7 theories of evolution:
-Cosmic Evolution. The development of space, time, matter and energy from nothing.
-Stellar Evolution. The development of complex stars from the chaotic first elements.
-Chemical Evolution. The development of all chemical elements from an original two.
-Planetary Evolution. The development of planetary systems from swirling elements.
-Organic Evolution. The development of organic life from inorganic matter (a rock).
-Macro-Evolution. The development of one kind of life from a totally different kind of life.
-Micro-Evolution. The development of variations within the same kind of life.
He also had 5 laws of evolution:
-Evolution:the understanding that the world is not constant, nor recently created, nor cycling, but is changing; and that the types of entities that live on it also change.
-Common descent:he understanding that every group of living entities that we know of on this planet descended from a common ancestor.
-Multiplication of species:the understanding that species either split into or bud off other species, often through the geographical isolation of a founder species.
-Gradualism:the understanding that changes take place through the gradual change of population rather than the sudden production of new individuals.
-Natural selection:he understanding that individuals in every generation are different from one another, or, at least some of them are. In every generation some individuals survive and reproduce better than others. Their genes multiply.
Some people might say that a "theory" is a statement intended to explain a phenomenon. Scientist come up with theories and if they can be proved and other scientist agree to this theory then that theory becomes a law. If not all scientist agree to this theory either because they flew in the face of cultural beliefs or because of lack of conclusive evidence, or because of some combination of factors. all five components have been proved, in simulations, observations, and experiment.
Citation-
http://www.rattlesnake.com/notions/evolution.html
http://www.allaboutthejourney.org/theory-of-evolution.htm
Gabriella Elmir
ReplyDeletePeriod 2, Hnrs.Biology
9/7/10
Dr.O
The validity of Law of Evolution is far more profound; when compared to the Theory of Evoultion. To date their are no documented cases that contridict the notion of evolution (at least that I know of); only religious and political beliefs would argue. Its been brought to my attention that only because verifying evolutional changes can sometimes be tricky; it has lead to many non-believers. Which is interesting because when we look at our planet we are able to realize it as changed or is changing; but its hard for us to all agree that after generations of change evolution can take place. In my perspective it is a great example of cause and effect. So, because of this I feel the term Law of Evolution is much more appropriate and accurate than Theory of Evolution.
Citation:
The Journal of Legal Studies © 1978 The University of Chicago.
http://www.jstor.org/pss/724222
Escalante, Period2
ReplyDeleteYes, there has been a document case that contradicts the notion of evolution in the year 1927, Tennessee Versus Scopes. At first the Tennessee Evolution states, the public Acts of the state of Tennessee passed by the sixty Fourth General Assembly in 1925 in the house of bill no.185.Having an act to banned or prohibit the teaching of evolution theory schools of Tennesse.Having to have penalties for those who violate. Any teacher of any school in the state of Tennessee are not able to teach any theory that denies the bible view like the story of the Divine Creation of man, or having us human descended from animals in the beginnings of life. It was stated that the ones violate the law are to be fined more than a hundred dollars to five hundred dollars for every violation offense. In 1927, John Thomas Scopes has been fined a hundred dollars for teaching evolution of human descending from animals in the public schools denying the bible version of how man was created. Also in 1968 another case Susan Epperson a teacher from Arkansas was against the state's anti evolution law and won in 1968 Supreme Court known as the famous Epperson vs. Arkansas. There has been many other teachers against Anti law evoulution.What is evolution? I like to answer it in one answer but I can’t. Even though I come from a religious catholic family, life was started something like God took dust from earth and made Adam and Eve simple as that. While evolution theory in science means an explanation of the origin of species of central main point theory of biology. I like to know evolution in one way and no other way that complicates it like the creation of the divine man bible style. But my love knowledge doesn't stop me from knowing other theories of evolution of ways how human creation was made according to science. We should be more open minded towards things while respecting other beliefs. Doesn’t mean because of learning evolution you don’t have to believe it but simply spreading your knowledge towards other things not contradicting your beliefs.
http://www.antievolution.org/topics/law/ http://www.law.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/conlaw/evolution.htm http://www.law.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/conlaw/Epperso.htm BOOKS=Evolution vs. creationism by Eugine C. Scott foreword by Niles Eldredge
Sophia Spackova
ReplyDeletePd. 2
The term "Law of Evolution" is more correct. There has been many facts found about evolution that make it solid. There probably isn't enough information out there right now to prove it as false either. Of course there the occasional people that have strong objections against the Law of Evolution, either on grounds of religious or political views. Now for evidence of evolution, the proof is in the pudding, so to speak. There has been strong similarities between humans and some animals, like the monkeys. There was even a report on the similarities of baboon and human blood clotting. I think the term "Law of Evolution" is more appropriate.
Citations:
http://evolution-textbook.org/content/free/notes/ch03_Notes.html
http://jap.physiology.org/cgi/pdf_extract/21/6/1713
http://www.cell.com/neuron/retrieve/pii/S0896627301001982
Adam Denmark
ReplyDeleteMrs. Ochatt
Period 7
9/08/10
Even before Charles Darwin published Origin of Species, conflict between science and religion had began. However serious argument over evolution did not begin until 1925, when a courtroom brawl of words between Clarance Darrow and William Jennings Bryan took place to ban the teaching of the "theory of evolution" in public classrooms in Tennessee. Then later in 1968, the Supreme Court ruled that the ban of the theory of evolution "contravened the establishment clause because their primary purpose was religious." The same explanation was used in the Edwards vs Aguillard case, in order to strike down a law in Louisiana that required biology teachers who taught the theory of evolution to also discuss evidence to support the theory called "creation science." The conflict between science and religion still goes on today, but in completely new forms. For example, in 1999, the Kansas Board of Education voted to remove evolution from the list of subjects tested on the state's standardized tests, thereby implying that local school boards should drop evolution as a subject altogether.
From my research I have formed my own opinion. The Theory of Evolution is more of a Law than a theory from what I have read. In reality, the theory states that "All life is related and has descended from a common ancestor." However this theory has more proof that it is true than most other scientific theories and should be considered a Law.
Citations:
Darwins Theory: http://www.darwins-theory-of-evolution.com/
History of the The Evolution Controversy: http://www.darwins-theory-of-evolution.com/
Camila A. Diaz
ReplyDeletePeriod 7
Honestly, I believe evolution isn't a theory, I believe it's a law. Darwin believed that everything was related to each other and "has descended from a common ancestor" whether it be a ladybug or a human, I tend to disagree on this, for example, I do believe that humans came from monkeys and lizards from a species of dinosaur and etc. but I don't believe that ladybugs came from the same cells or bacteria as monkeys. I think the monkey's first ancestor's genes or cells or bacteria developed differently than that of those of the ladybug's. Overall, yes we evolved but just not from the same thing.
http://www.darwins-theory-of-evolution.com/
Evolution, to many, is a theory. Mostly because their religion prohibits them from believing it. However, to me, evolution is like a law. Evolution is defined as the process of change. In the United States, it is still arguable of whether or not to have teachers teach the theory of evolution as a proven law. I believe it should be taught in schools because people are changing everyday. Since evolution is defined as the process of slow change of a species, and that is exactly what is happening, evolution should be considered a law. The theory of evolution is contradicted by many religious books, such as the bible. I for one am catholic. However, I do not believe what the bible says word for word. There could be a middle ground between the theory of evolution and the bible. I am not arguing with the bible, but I am also supporting the theory of evolution.
ReplyDeleteCitations:
http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/380970/does_the_theory_of_evolution_contradict.html
http://www.jstor.org/pss/2096742
Summer Ricardo
ReplyDeletePeriod 7
September 7, 2010
The "Theory of Evolution" with similar, but different, modes of change in the genetics of early human-like creatures to modern humans. It is all of the changes that have transformed life over immense time. The changes made the populations increase with the evolvement. The trends of different success can improve the thinking of the human brain. For example, if your parent can speak english fluently and they teach it to you at a young age, you will be able to adapt to it easier then the mind of an early human. The "Laws of Evoultion" are evolution as it is, common decendent, multiplication of species, gradualism, and natural selection. The theory of evolution is the basic evolvement of living things, but the law of evolution goes into the details as far as the decendents and natural selection and so forth. The validity, or logical truth, of the theory of evolution vs. the law of evolution is that the theory is only an educated guess with backed up details, but the law of evolution is set information that explains the process of evolution and how it applies to the world from early to modern living.
http://www.rattlesnake.com/notions/evolution.html
http://www.jstor.org/pss/2400240
Before Darwin's theory of evolution, there was already conflict on whether evolution is a theory, law, or absolute nonsense. In Darwin's theory of evolution basically says that complex creatures evolve from more simplistic ancestors naturally, that all things evolve from generation to generation. As random genetic mutations happen in an organism's genetic code, the beneficial mutations stay and get passed on to the next generation for survival, this is also known as a process called "natural selection." During time, the beneficial mutations gather up and form a completely new organism. Natural selection is used to preserve traits that can be used to the organism's advantage. But, the theory of evolution also states that we probably descended from hairy and hunched organisms, which people interpreted incorrectly as that we descended from monkeys. This brings us to the debate whether evolution is a theory or a law. In my opinion, evolution is a law, because the order of life is that naturally we adapt and give and get natural benefits, although I don't necessarily believe we descended from apes, but I think we probably descended from hairy organisms that were hunched over. Though others believe that the whole theory is nonsense and such beliefs should be banned. There was a trial called "The Scopes' trial" which was basically about the theory of evolution and whether it should be taught, though at that time it was illegal to do so. In conclusion, still today we are debating on whether evolution is a theory, a law, or just nonsense.
ReplyDeleteMariana Gaviria
ReplyDeleteDr. Ochatt
Per. 7
09/08/10
Evolution is aprocess of change in which species adapt from generation to generation through natural selection in order to survive. However, there is much conflict as to wether Darwin's proposal of evolution should be refered to as theory or law or even if the topic should be discussed in schools at all. Many people argue that the theory cannot be accepted as a law since there are many different beliefs about how humans and other organisms came to be. Creationism is one of the oldest theories in the world and it's a religious belief that a higher being created the world and all organisms in it. In fact, Darwin faced much opposition from the church and religious leaders while writing his theory because it directly contradicted their teachings. Today, the government feels that the theory of evolution is not to be taught as a law in order to avoid conflict because there are so many different beliefs. There have been court trials debating whether teachers should be able to teach about evolution. In fact, in 1925 a biology teacher in Dayton, Tennessee, John Thomas Scopes, was arrested for violating the butler act by teaching about evolution. The case became widely known as the Monkey Trial. Though it is not accepted by everyone I believe that there is enough evidence to prove that the thory of evolution is actually a law and it is present in the similarities organisms today share with those of the past.
- Bridgford, N. "Darwin's Theory of Evolution." Young Scientists Journal:The Online Science Journal Written and Edited by Young Scientists for Young Scientists. 2009. Retrieved Sept. 9, 2010, from http://www.ysjournal.com/text.asp?2009/2/7/48/57768
- Regal, B. "The Monkey TrialS." Retrieved Sept. 9, 2010, from http://kean.edu/~bregal/docs/Monkey%2520Trials.pdf
- Ginger, R. "Six days or forever?: Tennessee v. John Thomas Scopes." Retrieved Sept. 9, 2010, from http://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=cLcr_ae4LBAC&oi=fnd&pg=PA1&dq=John+Thomas+scopes+case&ots=8jRMNo-XmA&sig=CpZGAUOCqfdkoHLEe8Z2cYTyabc#v=onepage&q=John%20Thomas%20scopes%20case&f=false
- Osawa S., Jukes T. H., Watanabe K., and Muto A. "Recent evidence for evolution of the genetic code." Microbiology and Molecular Biology Reviews.Department of Biology, Nagoya University, Japan. Retrieved Sept. 9, 2010, from http://mmbr.asm.org/cgi/content/abstract/56/1/229
Jullian Ileto
ReplyDeletePeriod 7
Dr. Ochatt
Hbio.
A theory is a very misinterpreted word in English.
Most people think of it as a guess made from observations. They are only partially right. A theory is something that explains how the data from the observations happen. A law is something that happens very often and consistently in most cases. For example If a mother is pregnant she will always give birth to a child. That is a law. A theory tries to explain that.
The differences between the "Law of evolution" and the Theory is that the theory explains the Law. That theory says that evolution happens because the good traits are cultivated and bad traits are weeded out of the hereditary material. Hence the "Survival of the fittest".
As for a documented case from a reputable source contradicting evolution I have not been able to find a trustworthy source.
Moran, Laurence. "Evolution is a fact and a theory." TalkOrigins. Talk Origins Archive, 22 Jan 1998. Web. 8 Sep 2010. .
The Origins of Scientific "Law"
Jane E. Ruby Journal of the History of Ideas,Vol. 47, No. 3 (Jul. - Sep., 1986), pp. 341-359(article consists of 19 pages)
Published by: University of Pennsylvania Press
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2709657
Gould, Stephen. "Evolution as a fact and theory." The unofficial Stephen Jay Gould Archive. N.p., n.d. Web. 8 Sep 2010. .
Larry Jones
ReplyDeletePeriod 7
DI Williamson says that there are different types of evolution. I'm guessing that this one if the evolution of species.
It should not be a law, a law is defined as a natural phenomenom that occurs and can be proven at any time, in any situation. However, this type of evolution can not be proven and will never be proven.
The Bible contradicts this theory. The theory od Creation, which I believe is a Law, says that in 1 week, everything was created.
This makes sense because, your mom was given birth to by her mom and same with her mom, and her mom, and her mom, etc. Now i'm sure that an ape did not give birth to an almost ape. And that gave birth to an almost almost ape. And that gave birth to a human. That makes no sense! It almost sounds like a 1st grader's imagination to me.
Another article that contradicts that theory, is the book, Origin of Species by Charles Darwin. It clearly say, "Lastly, looking not to any one time, but at all time, if my theory be true, numberless intermediate varieties, linking closely together all the species of the same group, must assuredly have existed."
This also makes sense. The fossils of these creatures that evolved to there current animal should be springing up out of the ground. Unfortunately to the late Darwin, the only 'intermediate species' are burried deep in the ground in cemetaries of people mothers, fathers, and children (of which none were apes, monkeys, or any other non-human creature).
www.classicreader.com/book/107/45
dictionary.reference.com/browse/scientific+law
DI Williamson - Journal of Natural History
Kenzo Ramos
ReplyDeletePeriod 2 Honors Bio.
Today, many people argue whether evolution exists or whether it is a theory or a fact. Well, it is both a theory and a fact. A theory, often means imperfect fact but in scientific terminology, it is a comparison of collected concepts put together. A fact also doesn't mean "absolute certainty". There has been a bunch of evidence to back up evolution. The Theory of Evolution is the succession of organsisms adapting or changing to suit their environment for beneficial purposes such as surviving. A Law is a proven concept accepted throughout the scientific community. I think that it could be both but it all depends on how you look at things. There have been cases throughout the states debating whether it should be taught. One example is the Scopes Trial or better known as the monkey trial. Scopes was put in jail for prohibiting the Butler act in tennessee. This goes to show how people react to different beliefs.
Camille Gladieux.
ReplyDeletePeriod 7
Darwin's theory of law of evolution states that each and every organisim has a distant relative that it has formed from. And that gradually aquired "natural selection" that acts to preserve and accumulate minor advantageous genetic mutations. Thus slowly making gentic coding different for each generation. There are many arguments against this topic especially towards religion. The bible tells us that God was the one who created man. But Dawins theory contradicts this telling us we are just decendents of previouse homids. There is also another another book out called the Evolution: A theory in crises by Michael Denton. Denton goes on to question Darwin's theory scientificly. Personally, I stand on middle ground I can't give my opionon on this because I simply do not know which would be correct in my opion.
http://www.darwins-theory-of-evolution.com/
http://www.allaboutscience.org/darwins-theory-of-evolution-video.htm
Claudia Perera
ReplyDeleteH. BIology
Period 7
The expressions "Theory of Evolution" and "Law of Evolution" are both very valid but whichever is believed by an individual is based on the individuals opinions. Today, with one of the world's greatest controversies being "Science vs. Religion" the reasons for validity for each of these expressions has differentiated among individuals. For example, in our science textbooks we find evolution titled as the "Theory of Evolution" but can we really be sure its just a theory because its printed on paper. Or is the word "theory" very carefully placed in the term to not upset those of different cultures, societies, and most importantly religions in our nations schools and to not cause friction between schools, the public, and textbook corporations to avoid a downfall in the mass market of school textbooks which account for the income of a number of companies. This is not to say "Theory of Evolution" is not valid, it is the most generally accepted name for evolution for reasons other than mass marketing. Of course, we have the religion which is the number one factor challenging evolution and although we have a great amount of evidence suggesting evolution along with the famous Darwin "Origin of Species", this can never really be proven true for some. Now, for the "Law of Evolution" it is the complete opposite. It is hard for many to consider evolution a law but for others it is their only religious belief. There is much evidence to support the "Law of Evolution" such as human remains of prehistoric times, artifacts, geography, and studies such as anthropology and archeology. As well, there really is not a greater amount of evidence than there is about evolution about the validity of the sources of religions. Therefore, both of these expressions are very valid. However, the world is not divided into those who believe in the "Law of Evolution" and those who believe in the "Theory of Evolution". There are of course cases which contradict the notion of evolution. And there is more than one, Christianity, Catholicism, Judaism, Hinduism, etc., etc., etc. For now lets just focus on one. Lets take the contradiction "Genesis" which states that God created the Earth and all life forms and that it is all done in order and on purpose while evolution was an uncharted process that began from the smallest organisms (in this case not created by God but by the environmental conditions of Earth at the time) and about 4.5 billion years of geographical change. In conclusion, no matter what is proven and how valid each is, there will always be those who believe in the "theory" and those who believe in the "law".
Reference:
Kirkpatrick, Lee A. "Religion: Adaptation or Revolutionary By-Product" Attachment, Evolution, and the Psychology of Religion (2005). n. pag: Web. 8 Sep. 2010.
Benjamin Bax
ReplyDeletePeriod 7
Darwin's idea that organisms evolve over time has been the focus of many debates between scientists and intellectuals. One of the main areas of debate in this disagreement is whether the discovery should be categorized as a theory or a fact. Intellectuals disagree whether Darwin's conclusion can be counted as a tested and proven law, or an untested, but plausible theory. Those on the side of classifying it as a law use the obvious similarities in structure and DNA between fossilized remains and living organisms. They state that this connection is too important to ignore and overrules any small counterexamples. However, on the other side of the argument, people who support the theory classification give their own valid evidence. For example, they say that it cannot be a law because it cannot be proven. No one has been alive long enough to see a genetic change occur in a large group of organisms. In the end, the decision falls with each person, because neither side has enough evidence to prove the other wrong.
Angelica Ruiz
ReplyDeletePeriod 7
Dr. O
Biology 1 Honors
9/9/10
First of all, a theory is a well-tested explanation that justifies a variety of observations. A scientific law, on the other hand, is a statement that describes a natural process, and it has to be accepted by the scientific community. The theory of evolution states that all of the many, many organisms alive today, along with humans, evolved gradually over billions of years, from a common origin with the usual “survival of the fittest” rules. The individual organisms that adapt to their environment the best reproduced and had their best traits passed on to their offspring. Through the ages, favorable qualities increased and changed the individual organisms into a species with no resemblance to their ancestor. The law of evolution, however, merely states that species change, and “the fittest” are the ones that survive and have offspring with inherited characteristics. This leads to a completely different species.
Here comes the question: “Why do we say ‘theory of evolution’ and not ‘law of evolution’?” There is no real proof that can be found on evolution. It is such a long process that covers an immense span of time. There are indications that support evolution. It is not something that you can reproduce in the laboratory, like the law of gravity. This is why evolution is not referred to as a law. As far as I have looked, there is no documented case that contradicts the notion of evolution. It would be like a person writing a document saying that humans came from butterflies. I mean, really!!
http://evolution.mbdojo.com/theory.html
http://www.albalagh.net/kids/science/evolution.shtml
Theory in everyday use, means a guess or hunch, that may need proof. The word theory, in experimental science is a careful attempt to explain certain observable facts of nature through experiments. ut is close to proven as any thing in science can be. Many think good theories grow up to be facts, and beter ones become laws. While some say laws describe facts/obervations and theories explain them, and a theory never becomes a law. A scientific theory is an attempt to explain how this natural occurence works, and a scientific law is a mathematical description of of this natural occurence. Evolutionists say major evolutionary changes happen too slowly, or rarely, to be observable in the lifetime of humans. Theodosius Dobzhansky said, even when evolutionary changes do occur, they are by nature "unique, unrepeatable, and irreversible. Evolution must be accepted with faith by its believers, many of whom deny the existence, or power of the Creator.
ReplyDelete"Evolution Is Not Just a Theory." Evolution Is Not Just a Theory: Home. Web. 09 Sept. 2010. .
Menton, David N. "Is Evolution a Theory, a Fact, or a Law?" TurnPike Web Hosting Services and E-Commerce Solutions. Missouri Association for Creation. Web. 09 Sept. 2010. .
Luis Peñas
ReplyDeletePeriod7
When Darwin had the idea of the theory of evolution, many scientist took serious consideration to this idea. As many people starting taking to study and reserch his idea, some scientist thought of it actually becoming a law. Biologist then started expirementing with the idea of how we evolved to our closest biological relative the monkey. They discovered amazing things between us and monkeys. I personally believe that the theory of evolution is true, but should remain a theory.
http://www.law.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/conlaw/evolution.htm
http://brightline.typepad.com/
http://www.darwins-theory-of-evolution.com/
Luis Peñas
ReplyDeletePeriod7
When Darwin had the idea of the theory of evolution, many scientist took serious consideration to this idea. As many people starting taking to study and reserch his idea, some scientist thought of it actually becoming a law. Biologist then started expirementing with the idea of how we evolved to our closest biological relative the monkey. They discovered amazing things between us and monkeys. I personally believe that the theory of evolution is true, but should remain a theory.
http://www.law.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/conlaw/evolution.htm
http://brightline.typepad.com/
http://www.darwins-theory-of-evolution.com/
Broderick Schwinghammer
ReplyDeletePeriod 2
Evolution is a process in which organisms change genetically over a period of time. The topic of evolution however, is on debate for whether it is a theory or a law. Unfortunately, evolution takes place over a long period of time making it very difficult to record. However we see its effects all around in the way humans, animals, and plants behave and interact with their environment. Another reason why evolution is hard to observe is because it can occur on different scales. There’s micro-evolution, it which small genetic variation occurs between species, and macro-evolution, in which genetic changes are so powerful that they cause on organism to complete change into another. I think the main reason that this is a topic of debate is because most people need to see to believe and thus are prone to look for macro-evolution, which would take hundreds of years to occur. Because of this, this topic is still open for debate.
By Dr. David N. Menton, Ph.D, “Is Evolution a Theory, a Fact, or a Law?”
http://mall.turnpike.net/C/cs/theory.htm
Broderick Schwinghammer
ReplyDeletePeriod 2
Evolution is a process in which organisms change genetically over a period of time. The topic of evolution however, is on debate for whether it is a theory or a law. Unfortunately, evolution takes place over a long period of time making it very difficult to record. However we see its effects all around in the way humans, animals, and plants behave and interact with their environment. Another reason why evolution is hard to observe is because it can occur on different scales. There’s micro-evolution, it which small genetic variation occurs between species, and macro-evolution, in which genetic changes are so powerful that they cause on organism to complete change into another. I think the main reason that this is a topic of debate is because most people need to see to believe and thus are prone to look for macro-evolution, which would take hundreds of years to occur. Because of this, this topic is still open for debate.
By Dr. David N. Menton, Ph.D, “Is Evolution a Theory, a Fact, or a Law?”
http://mall.turnpike.net/C/cs/theory.htm
Broderick Schwinghammer
ReplyDeletePeriod 2
Evolution is a process in which organisms change genetically over a period of time. The topic of evolution however, is on debate for whether it is a theory or a law. Unfortunately, evolution takes place over a long period of time making it very difficult to record. However we see its effects all around in the way humans, animals, and plants behave and interact with their environment. Another reason why evolution is hard to observe is because it can occur on different scales. There’s micro-evolution, it which small genetic variation occurs between species, and macro-evolution, in which genetic changes are so powerful that they cause on organism to complete change into another. I think the main reason that this is a topic of debate is because most people need to see to believe and thus are prone to look for macro-evolution, which would take hundreds of years to occur. Because of this, this topic is still open for debate.
By Dr. David N. Menton, Ph.D, “Is Evolution a Theory, a Fact, or a Law?”
http://mall.turnpike.net/C/cs/theory.htm
Jasmine Felix
ReplyDeleteHonors Biology P.7
Dr. Ochatt
9/9/10
A scientific theory is a well-tested explanation that makes sense of a great variety of scientific observations. A scientific law is a theory proven to be true and accepted the scientific world. That is the difference between the “Theory of Evolution” and “Law of Evolution”. The “theory” or “law” of evolution is a scientific explanation of the origin of species of plants and animals. This theory is not to be considered a law because of the opposing views of the people. This theory is not taken of the same credence as Newton’s Laws of Gravity because there are so many that oppose it. This is a huge conflict the theory has proof to be true in the scientific world but not to the religious because of it not matching up with the words of the bible. So can this theory ever be considered a proof enough to be a law?
http://dml.cmnh.org/1997Aug/msg00565.html
http://mall.turnpike.net/C/cs/theory.htm
http://www.pnas.org/content/72/2/646.short
There is a great difference inbetween a law and a theory. A law is a statement that describes an action, but cannot explain why, while a theory summarized why something happens. So the Theory of Evolution describes why organisms evolve and adapt to their environment, while the Law of Evolution states that organisms adapt to their environment and evolve, but does not explain why. I believe that evolution is a theory because we have examples of evolution and we know why it happens; because of natural selection. I could not find any cases that contradict evolution.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.darwins-theory-of-evolution.com/
Javier Roque
ReplyDeletePeriod 2
I believe that evolution has no true definition as whether it is a law or a theory. I believe this because I find countless articals of people saying evolution is a law because "such and such" and vice versa for the people saying evolution is a theory. Yes, they are ideas about how we humans all started out and people supplying articals about the "facts" on how we began, and that's great and all but nothing is really "on the record", so all I can draw from this research is an inconclusive conclusion that, "Evolution can be both a theory and a law, and right now, it's one of the biggest mysteries in the universe."
Citations: http://www.darwins-theory-of-evolution.com/
http://www.nsf.gov/
http://evolution.berkeley.edu/
Claudia Porrua
ReplyDeleteP.7
Evolution involves natural selection, which happens to be the advantage that certain organisms receive to adapt and survive in their habitat for a longer period of time. This characteristic is then passed on, to other succeeding generations. Yes, there have been contradictions against Evolution. “All life appears to be designed, and evolutionists have failed to adequately explain why.” Many people against evolution use the excuse of having no proof, to back up this theory. Evolutionists have created a diagram showing the various life forms. Others contradict this tree because they say that, if this tree was correct, there would be more life forms from the ancient time to the present day.
Citation: http://www.darwins-theory-of-evolution.com/
http://www.allaboutcreation.org/evidence-against-evolution-faq.htm
People, animals, bugs, there not exactly the same as they were thousands of years ago. Evolution is real and is happening. People's bodies adapt and then the next generation has that trait and the species evolve. In the world, in politics, in experiments, people don't agree so making evolution into a law is really hard. So it remains a theory. Evolution is tricky because it states we all evolved from the same thing and thats not entirely true. Different chemicals, irons, air.There are so many different types of basic cells to make all different type of things. Also religion tends to contradict science, so the scientific people will never agree with the religious people.
ReplyDeleteChristina Soto
ReplyDeletePeriod 4
A debate without hard evidence isn’t anything more than a battle of opinions. A person may choose to believe anything they desire, but it does not make it right. It is merely an opinion. When we back an opinion with proof, we are making case.
Evidence is helpful in forming conclusions (theories), while proof concludes the matter altogether (law). If we had proof, the theory of evolution wouldn't be called a theory. It would be called a Law.
Darwin’s Theory of Evolution states that man evolved from lower order of animals such as primates and that life in general began from inorganic matter. Design is not a factor in Darwin’s Theory. Creation on the other hand implies that a divine creator has used his/her genius to develop the live forms we see. It can be concluded that if concept and design are present, then an intelligent designer must exists. Design is evident in all aspects of biology and science for that matter. From the tiniest of cells to the largest mammal, all creatures great and small have a perfect design. All matter has design. Even an atom has a perfect design. All parts of the atom as well as all living organism are designed to work together for the betterment of the whole. Design in biology, therefore signifies evidence that a ‘designer’ exists. The principal of detecting design in biology, or the case for Intelligent Design, contradicts the notion of evolution.
.
Ciatation http://www.allaboutcreation.org/creation-vs-evolution-n.htm
http://education.jlab.org/atomtour/listofparticles.html
Dominick Mulder
ReplyDeletePeriod 2
Dr. O
In my personal opinion, Evolution should be considered a theory rather than a law. This is because no matter how much evidence we gather, we will not have 100% proof of it, since we were not alive at the beginning of the Earth to see it happen. However, this is just my opinion, and others may believe that there is enough proof for it to be considered a law, as different people have different views.
http://wilstar.com/theories.htm
xelene martinez
ReplyDeleteperiod 4
Everyone has the right to their own opinion no matter what any scientist will tell you. I think that this is a personal decision based on your beliefs. Either you understand but yet don’t believe this is true then it is just a “theory of evolution”. Or you agree and comprehend and it is a “law of evolution”. However the final decision is made by looking at the correct definitions of law verses evolution. A law is a repeated observation that has never been proven wrong. A theory is collection of concepts that explains scientific observations but yet can be believed to be false. With this in mind evolution is just a law but some people would beg to differ.
http://www.allaboutthejourney.org/theory-of-evolution.htm
Zack Schneider
ReplyDeleteDr.Ochatt
Period 4
Darwin's Theory of Evolution is the widely held notion that all life is related and has descended from a common ancestor. Darwin's Theory of Evolution is a theory in crisis in light of the tremendous advances we've made in molecular biology, biochemistry and genetics over the past fifty years. Some examples of Evolution include the following,
Cosmic Evolution. The development of space, time, matter and energy from nothing.
Stellar Evolution. The development of complex stars from the chaotic first elements.
Chemical Evolution. The development of all chemical elements from an original two.
Planetary Evolution. The development of planetary systems from swirling elements.
Organic Evolution. The development of organic life from inorganic matter (a rock).
Macro-Evolution. The development of one kind of life from a totally different kind of life.
Micro-Evolution. The development of variations within the same kind of life.
Rather than call a law a theory, it is better, and more convenient, to call them laws. They are, after all, as well established as Newton's Laws.
1. Evolution as such-
This is the understanding that the world is not constant, nor recently created, nor cycling, but is changing; and that the types of entities that live on it also change.
2. Common descent
This is the understanding that every group of living entities that we know of on this planet descended from a common ancestor.
3. Multiplication of species
This is the understanding that species either split into or bud off other species, often through the geographical isolation of a founder species.
4. Gradualism
This is the understanding that changes take place through the gradual change of population rather than the sudden production of new individuals.
5. Natural selection
This is the understanding that individuals in every generation are different from one another, or, at least some of them are. In every generation some individuals survive and reproduce better than others. Their genes multiply.
www.darwins-theory-of-evolution.com/
www.allaboutthejourney.org/theory-of-evolution.htm
www.rattlesnake.com/notions/evolution.html