Dave's ESL Cafe's Student Discussion Forums

[a_muslim_guy]

hi every one ...

i think we took Darwin's theory in biology. what do you think about it ?
_________________
C++ Programmer

[SonyeuNAnh]

true

[Soymilk]

I think you would get more responses if you explain what Darwin's Theory is.

Charles Darwin's Theory of Evolution.

[christina_nguyen]

According to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolution "In Darwin's 1859 book, The Origin of Species. Darwin and Wallace proposed that evolution occurs because a trait that increases an individual's chance of successfully reproducing will become more common, by inheritance, from one generation to the next, and likewise a trait that decreases an individual's chance of reproducing will become rarer."

I think that Darwin's Theory of Evolution is true because scientists have tested many generations of different organisms using their morphology, DNA, and RNA, and they have found that all organisms are related. Even though organisms today look different from their ancestors due to natural selection, they all come from the same common ancestor.

Just a few thoughts!

--Christina

[cionaro]

I think it is not logical at all to say Darwin's theory is true or not.
it a theory so let's be more rational. a theory is based on scientific observation and the sceintist's interpretation of these observation.

if you say it is correct, then you agree with the way of thinkin of the scientist, but if you say it is false you must suggest your interpretation (which must be logicaal and concise), or you must precise the point you don't agree with in the thinking of the researcher.

i am also a muslim person. but i am afraid we can not disagree with scientific facts with religious ones. let science be a sourse of unity between human beeings.
_________________
you can't separate peace
from freedom because
no one can be at peace
unless he has freedom
Malcolm X

[acadman]

Darwin's principle of natural selection is a new kind of scientific theory, and one that is logically sound. The principle is composed of three parts: variation, selection, and reproduction.
(1) Variation. All individual organisms in a species vary slightly from one another. These variations are not directed, but are random. This is a matter of common observation. Darwin and Wallace were consumate observers, and knew that natural world very well.
(2) Selection. These differences may bestow slight advantages or disadvantages on the organisms that possess them in the struggle for existence with other organisms, with disease, and with the environment. Under changing conditions of existence, these differences tell quite strongly. Those organisms with slight advantages (say, in the ability to catch prey, avoid predators, weather harsh conditions of existence, or resist disease) will live longer and reproduce more. On the other hand, those with disadvantageous variations are ruthlessly eliminated.
(3) Reproduction. In the natural world, animals, plants, and microrganisms reproduce in great quantities, and the offspring have most of the characteristics of their parents, and some variations from their parents. However, not all the offspring survive in the struggle with other organisms and the environment. In the new generation, selection again picks over the fittest.
It follows from this process, that the only organisms that can endure and become abundant over time are those with characteristics that fit them well to their environment. Thus, we see that Darwin's principle is a kind of necessity; Nature is impelled to follow this path, has no choice in the matter. The wondrous adaptations and correlations we see in Nature are the outcome of necessity, and not the product of design. There are few theories in science as sound as this. So I vote 'True'.
_________________
Bruce Sommerville
English Tuition On-Line
http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/acadman/

[ClarissaMach]

The problem is that, for some people, admitting that the Darwin's theory is true means accepting that man came from apes, and therefore, was not created in God's image... it also means that creatures were not conceived the way they are now; instead, they went through an evolution process that shaped them the way they're now.
_________________
Stormy Weather.

[Mallaien]

First off I am not a creationist...

but remeber they are both "Theories" and that means that science still does not have full proof of either.

you cannot admit any science theory as true, because there is no proof for it to become a "law". like "the law of gravity" gravity is a law because its a proven fact. I think its silly to take a side on somthing that is still "imaginary" at this point.
Oh there are some bones and artifacts that put more belief to evolution, but scientits dont think they have enought evidence yet, to make it the "law". So I would side on the scientist, and say that there is more evidence that evolution may be a route, but im not fully convinced to go all the way.

[Edoardo]

Well, it depends... Darwin's theory is not 100% right, as it doesn't explain everything about evolutionism: in fact, as Mallaien says, it's still just a theory. But it is the best we have now, as it is, nowadays, the most likely to be true. So... as long as this theory will satisfy science and our rationality, even it not fully, I'd say "Yes".

[leila heidarvand]

[redset]

[beancurdturtle]

Hmmmm.

You forgot to give the choice "irrelevant"
_________________
Daniel

�Be who you are and say what you feel because those who mind don't matter and those who matter don't mind.�
--Dr. Seuss

[I am Christian]

Neoteny(a Darwin cocept) is not a scientific concept.
My opinion is that some darwin concepts also can be understood
with experience, they doesn't need a lot of studies that have high costs...

[chesel42]

I am studying Science at university and this topic comes up often. Scientific theory can not be 100% proven, it can only be proven to be wrong. And so far there is more evidence to suggest that evolution is true, but there is are several huge pieces of information that go against it.

Darwin himself said that his idea was not meant to be taken and applied in a broad sense, yet it has been. Now a theory has been assumed to be fact and no other reasoning is thought to be true.

The more I learn about evolution and look into the evidence, the less I believe that it is true.

To follow evolution you need to believe many things that can not be explained. This is the same as creation, but for my part I am more inclined to believe creation than evolution.

[beancurdturtle]