Here are some arguments for Creation or against Evolution.
These point to Divine Creation:
Dr. Jonathan Wells published a book in 2002 entitled Icons of Evolution. Dr. Wells states that the book shows that "the best-known 'evidences' for Darwin's theory have been exaggerated, distorted or even faked."
"The astounding structural complexity of a cell" (U.S. National Library of Medicine).
Concerning a single structure within a cell: "Without the motor protein, the microtubules don't slide and the cilium simply stands rigid. Without nexin, the tubules will slide against each other until they completely move past each other and the cilium disintegrates. Without the tubulin, there are no microtubules and no motion. The cilium is irreducibly complex. Like a mousetrap, it has all the properties of design and none of the properties of natural selection" (Michael Behe, prof. of biophysics).
"Exploring the Influence of Specific Genes on Human Evolution"
There is a wealth of evidence supporting evolution, including the fossil record which shows gradual change over time, comparative anatomy which reveals similarities among different species, molecular genetics which demonstrates common ancestry through shared DNA sequences, and observable examples of natural selection and adaptation in action. These lines of evidence all point to the process of evolution as the best explanation for the diversity of life on Earth.
The main mechanisms of evolution are natural selection, genetic drift, gene flow, and mutation. Natural selection is the process by which organisms better adapted to their environment tend to survive and reproduce. Genetic drift refers to random fluctuations in allele frequencies in a population. Gene flow involves the transfer of genetic material between different populations, and mutation introduces new genetic variation.
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.
The agent used to destroy microorganisms on an article depends on the type of microorganism present, the surface of the article, and the desired level of disinfection. Common agents include disinfectants, antiseptics, and sterilants, each with different levels of efficacy and appropriate uses.
An article directly from wikianswers.
You can find an overview of stelar evolution in the Wikipedia article entitled "Stellar evolution".
late 2008, early 2009 i think
Wikipedia has a good article on the AK- Wikianswers is for brief answers.
Article of what country.
There is no connection between the two companies. Answers.com, which is the parent of WikiAnswers has an agreement that allows them to pull up the appropriate link and an excerpt from the Wikipedia article.
A link to the article is provided, but WikiAnswers does not endeavor to do your homework for you.
"Exploring the Influence of Specific Genes on Human Evolution"
It is against the rules of WikiAnswers website to put a URL in a question. But you can get a website translated from Spanish to English by using a website such as the Related link below.
Since nobody has answered the answer is obviously "No, nobody cares". But it is an important question. Let's ask how to make \wikianswers get up to speed with changing source articles.
Well, whether you agree with evolution or not, it's a FACT. I suggest you read the Wikipedia article on Evolution, to get a general idea. There are also good videos on YouTube which explain you the science part; for example, several videos by Aron Ra.
no, when he published the article on evolution or what he called natural selection nobody like that and said he was BLAH