I finally finished my evolution essay, can someone go over it and tell me what they think PLEASE AND THANK YOU?

Question

so before i put it here, i would like to note that even though i am a sophomore in highschool. i knew NOTHING about evolution. literally nothing, in our christian highschool all we ever learned about evolution is the reasons why it is wrong. and plus I'm just extremely SLOW in science in general. this is all from information I accumulated in the past 2 days (I'm also a procrastinator) I'm not looking for any harsh judgement, just anything I could add or take out THANKS SO MUCH
(and I'm going to work cite the things from websites dont worry no plagerism here)


The beginning of the earth has been a mystery, boggling the minds of the erudite and the simple minded alike for years. The topic of creation vs. evolution has become increasingly controversial. In biology, Darwin’s Theory of Evolution is a change in the genetic material of a population of organisms from one generation to the next. Though changes produced in any one generation are normally small, differences accumulate with each generation and can, over time, become substantial changes in the population. Such similarities among species suggest that all known species are descended from a common ancestor (or ancestral gene pools process of gradual divergence). Evolution is supported in many different ways, but one major category pointing to its validity is fossils. Through fossil dating, hominoid fossils, and, evolution has become the theory accepted by the majority of those in the scientific forefront.

Evolution is supported through fossil records. The study of the sequence of occurrence in rocks reveals the relative time in which organisms lived. This technique shows that one layer of rock is older or younger than another. Later through the discovery of radioactivity, scientists were given the opportunity to learn the age of fossils and rocks . Through these records, a vague timeline is illustrated of the evolutionary change that has been occurring over the past four billion years. This proves that the earth is much older then creationist would like to argue. A popular criticism of the fossil records is that the gaps in this timeline are enough to disprove the line all together, but the more that is learned about the evolution of specific species line’s, the more these gaps or missing links in the chain are filled with transitional fossil specimens. A specific example of this is the Archaeopteryx. This was the earliest and most primitive bird known . The London specimen of this bird was discovered only two years after the publication of On the Origin of Species. Fossils records are one factor that works to make evolution true beyond a reasonable doubt.


Evolution is supported through hominoid fossils. Hominoids are those belonging to the super family Homiondea which includes apes, humans, and, sub-species in between this spectrum. Evolution refers to the slow process of human adaption over millions of years, so hominids are crucial in giving legitimacy to the concept that humans were slowly developed and that there ancestry is rooted in another species. The roots of humanity are believed to be located in South Africa where the earliest hominoids are discovered. Many hominids fossils of fragmented body and skull have been discovered. One of the more famous examples is Lucy, discovered by Donald Johanson and Tom Gray in 1974 At Hadar in Ethiopia . Lucy was an adult female of twenty-five years olds and is placed into the Australopithecus afarensis category. Hominids are a major support of evolution.


Evolution is supported by transitional fossils. Transitional fossils are the remains of intermediary forms of life that illustrate an evolutionary transition. Such fossils would serve as evidence to the principle that life is developed through evolving organisms, which again, points to one ancestral source. In the time of Charles Darwin, knowledge of fossil records were scarce, and He himself said in regards to the lack of transitional fossils "this is the most obvious and gravest objection which can be urged against my theory” , since then scientists became more enlightened in transitional fossil groups and more were discovered, as he also predicted. Some examples are the Nautoloidea, this is a group of marine cephalopods belong to the subclass Nautioidea. Nautioidea’s begin in the late Cambrian and are represented today by the living Nautilus . This is one of the many examples of one transitional forms discovered through fossils linking one species to another. Examples of these links are fish to tetra pods, amphibians to amniotes, and dinosaurs to birds. Transitional forms are a major support of evolution


Fossils through fossil dating, hominoid fossils, and living fossils shed much light to evolution and its validity. Although it only covers a small section of the multi-faceted theory, it is a crucial one. Fossils can be used as a testament to the gradual changes in nature and in mankind. It also shows that the world is extremel

Answer 1

This is a really good essay. I am doubly impressed that you were able to research this with very little help from your school and teacher who apparently treat evolution like like an unpleasant but unavoidable pair of smelly socks they have to deal with. So this idea that they teach kids nothing about it other than to send them out to get "education by Internet" and return with reasons why one of the core principles of science are wrong, is just a HORRIBLE approach to education.



But you have seen past that and seem to have found some good sources.



A few points:



1. "Darwin’s Theory of Evolution is a change in the genetic material of a population of organisms from one generation to the next."



That is an excellent definition for the word 'evolution' itself ... not Darwin's theory. Darwin's theory explains WHY evolution (change) occurs. His theory is called 'natural selection', which you don't cover (and that's fine). But it's important to understand the difference between the concept of evolution, and the theory that *explains* it.



(By the way, here's a source you can cite for that definition: http://www.biology-online.org/dictionary/Evolution )



2. The rest of your essay only concerns the *fossil* evidence for evolution. This is only one small part of the evidence for evolution. (The DNA evidence alone is enough to establish common ancestry between species, even if not a single fossil had ever been found!)



However, I notice from your other post, that you seem to be required to limit your essay to just fossils. That's too bad ... but not your fault.



3. "... a vague timeline is illustrated ..." I wouldn't call the timeline "vague" ... it's pretty specific. I would reword this as "... a timeline emerges ... "



4. I really like how you laid out the structure of your essay, and then re-established that structure in the first (and last) sentence of each paragraph. Your school may not teach science well, but they are teaching the basics of good essay writing.



5. "This proves that the earth is much older then creationist would like to argue. " Avoid the word "proves" when talking about science. You prove things in math, not science. The word "shows" would work just as well here.



(Oh, and its "than creationists", not "then creationist".)



6. "The London specimen of this bird was discovered only two years after the publication of On the Origin of Species. "



Two things ... archaeopteryx was not a 'bird' in the modern sense. Scientists would call it a 'primitive bird', or better, 'bird-like dinosaur'.



Second, you have not established what the Origin of Species is, or when it was published, or why this is relevant ... so this sentence doesn't tell the reader much. So you have to say something like: ""The London specimen of this bird was discovered in 1861, only two years after the publication of 'On the Origin of Species', the book in which Charles Darwin laid out the theoretical framework for evolution. So this fossil provided powerful evidence for Darwin's framework."



7. You jump back a couple of times between the words 'hominoid' and 'hominid'. Pick one. Hominoids are the apes, hominids are the great apes, so either one would do.



Also, spelling error: "Homiondea" should be "Hominoidea."



8. The roots of humanity are located in Eastern Africa, not South Africa (which is a country). For example, Ethiopia is in Eastern Africa.



9. "Hominids are a major support of evolution." Reword as: "Hominid fossils are a major source of support for evolution."



10. (Ditto with last sentence of next paragraph.)



11. "there ancestry" should be "their ancestry".



12. "He [Darwin] himself said in regards to the lack of transitional fossils "this is the most obvious and gravest objection which can be urged against my theory” "



Careful there. That's not quite true. A lot of anti-evolution sites *love* to point to this quote as if Darwin was seriously worried about the 'transitional fossil' "problem". But if you read the full quote, you can see he wasn't. He had an answer.



http://darwin-online.org.uk/content/frameset?viewtype=text&itemID=F373&pageseq=298

(Search for "gravest objection".)



Notice that Darwin's very next sentence is: "The explanation lies, as I believe, in the extreme imperfection of the geological record." And then Darwin elaborates in great detail (an entire chapter) the *solution* to this problem. (Namely, that the fossil record is 'imperfect' ... fossilization is a rare event so we would not *expect* to see a smooth gradation of transitional fossils from species to species, but instead spotty "snapshots" every so-many million years .)



Just be aware that this is part of the shallow anti-evolution tactics used by Creationists. Darwin introduces a chapter by saying (honestly), "People who object to my theory will point to the gaps in the fossil record, and this is one of their best arguments. But my response to this argument is as follows ..." But when Creationists quote this, they only include the first sentence, and don't even mention the "solution is as follows ..." part. They are deliberately leaving the false impression that Darwin was just 'stumped'!



This is a TERRIFIC example of the kind of dishonesty you are dealing with.





Good job! Good luck!

Answer 2

Evolution Essay

Answer 3

For the best answers, search on this site https://shorturl.im/G1aJo



I don't totally remember where everything began and where things kind of faded out (though I still at least appreciate MOST everything I have been into heavily through my life), but to the best that I can do it. Here we go: Grade School - I was into a lot of stuff ranging from stuff like Elvis Costello, Warren Zevon (according to my mother he was my first favorite artist), the Beatles, and I loved the Monkees to stuff like Bruce Springsteen (when Born in the USA came out I was huge into it) and Madonna. I remember loving the Don Henley record that had Boys of Summer and New York Minute on it (can't think of the name right now). I was really into some of the 80s pop like the Thompson Twins and Howard Jones, and through my brother and sisters I got into some ska stuff like the Specials and Madness and the Selector and some new wave stuff like the Cure and Depeche Mode. I also was really into Paul Simon's Graceland and Weird Al. Right about as I was going into junior high I learned about classic rock radio... In junior high, I started off having just gotten into classic rock and listened to a lot of Zeppelin, the Doors and Creedence particularly. At this also my dad started getting into the Pogues and I couldn't get enough of Peace and Love and If I Should Fall From Grace With God. At a certain point the Metallica Black Album came out, as did Megadeath's Countdown to Extinction, both of which caught my attention, and at some point I got They Might Be Giants' Flood. I got into Faith No More (I think that was jr. high and not high school, but I could be mistaken). Then in the summer before 8th grade I heard Alice In Chains' Sap, Pearl Jam's Ten and Nirvana's Nevermind. This took me into a three year span of Alice in Chains being my favorite band, followed closely by Nirvana, and all sorts of Pearl Jam and Soundgarden. And that's how I started high school. A little into high school though, though nothing was really touching AIC and Nirvana I also found my way to the Smiths and REM and more Depeche Mode and the Cure. I also still was listening to everything from the prior periods (you should see some of my mix tapes from this period, they were all over the place). There was an ugly period in here too where I also mixed in a bit of really bad 90s radio pop. At the height of it, I bought the Snow record (I think that was a pretty hilarious way to bottom out). Around now, and I think the prior was a symptom of needing a change. Truth be told I was changing and everything felt stagnant. Around the middle of my junior year someone handed me a copy of the Kids soundtrack and I started to hear Sonic Youth and the Pixies. At this point I heard Tom Waits, old enough to appreciate what was going on. I was into Beck, Elastica, the Breeders, and Frank Black, and then came Lollapalooza 5. To get ready for this there was much I got Pavment records and Sonic Youth records. I started getting into Sebadoh and the Folk Implosion. A lot of really, really great stuff that I stil count among my favorites today. So, right after high school. Good Will Hunting got me into Elliott Smith. The revelation that half of Pavement was involved in the Silver Jews got me stared with them. Thanks to a mix tape that a friend gave me I got into the Shins, Built to Spill, Guided By Voices (though I got a record), and a bunch of other stuff. I remember picking up Oh Inverted World and not being able to get it out of my cd changer for like 5 months. At some point a friend showed me Dr. Octagon and another friend showed me Jurassic 5. A friend convinced me that it was about time I tried the Beatles out again when I was 20, he also told me that checking out Simon and Garfunkel would be worth my time, both of which payed amazing dividends. A friend of mine got me going on Grandaddy. This site has gotten me to check out a lot of stuff. Among other stuff. It seems like I find out about more interesting stuff these days than I can honestly keep up with. Well, there are some scattered thoughts and name drops. I still listen to a whole lot of stuff from all of those periods though. I still seem to remember what it was that drew me to them in the first place BA: Yeah, I think so, but I think it's been more about refining and extending outward. I'm really happy that I can still get into the stuff I liked when I was a kid, but I feel it just comes down to hearing more stuff and thus knowing more sounds. Better or worse is really hard to determine, but you can definitely say that you've got more information.

Answer 4

It's not too bad, but your spelling and grammar need work...

Answer 5

Check out, please