Click here to have a similar A+ quality paper

Order Now

Evolution vs. intellengent design

CLICK HERE FOR HELP ON THIS PAPER……………………. 
Paper instructions:

Instructions:

The paper is to be submitted in Safe Assign.  It should be 3-5 pages, double-spaced.  You should discuss Evolution versus Intelligent Design. You should include a bibliography page as well.  A good starting point for the paper may be a film or concise article.  Ben Stein’s “Expelled” includes interviews with people on either side of the debate.  Pay special attention to the names and sources he cites in the video to serve as a springboard for additional research.  Develop your own opinion and support that opinion with factual data, NOT “well I think it is.”  Use scientific, authoritative sources to validate your conclusions.  If you think evolution is a valid theory, cite scientists who believe in this theory and organize your paper around the information.  If you believe in intelligent design, use factual data to support your conclusions and create a well developed paper arguing your conclusion.  DO NOT PLAGARIZE!  If you have any questions or don’t know where to start, I have a copy of the Stein movie and the library has various other sources.  I will be glad to help in any way with the document.
Documentation should utilize Turabian style citations.  Please see attached for examples, instructions, etc.
CLICK HERE FOR HELP ON THIS PAPER…………………….
Paper Requirements
Each discipline of a college requires specific styles to formalize submitted papers. English Departments usually require MLA-style. Psychology students are instructed in APA-style. Social Science Departments most often use Turabian-Chicago style. As History is a Social Science, we will utilize the Turabian-Chicago style.
While you are not writing a research paper, it does require documentation of sources.  The Paper must be at least 3 pages long, both double-spaced, with Ariel or Times New Roman fonts, and a pitch of 12. Each page, except for the first page, must be numbered in Arabic style, (2, 3, 4, 5), on the top line of the page, on the right margin, one-inch from the top of the paper, 3 lines above the first line of text on the page.  Each page requires a one-inch margin on the top, bottom, and both sides. Use left-justification only (right-justification would result in additional spaces which would be counted against your grade), double-spaced throughout, and pay particular attention to grammar, composition, spelling, and spacing between letters and after punctuation. Use spell-checker software on your computer or the dictionary for words not resident in your spell-checker. Use correct punctuation and spacing between punctuation marks, (i.e., one space after a semi-colon, two spaces after a colon).
Avoid using unacceptable fonts or increased spacing to expand your paper to reach minimum requirements. Do NOT change your font/size/color on this paper, but use the same throughout your work to present a professional and consistent work. This will be an obvious attempt to circumvent requirements and dealt with appropriately.
The first page of the Paper must begin with your name, the instructor’s name, the course and the date on the left hand margin of the paper, double-spaced.  You must separate the title from the work with 2 lines. Each paragraph must be indented by 5 spaces. The second page of text and each additional page must begin one-inch below the top of the page. The first page is not numbered, but each page from Page 2 is numbered consecutively, right-justified at the top of the page (only pages of text are numbered).
While the Content Pages are the heart of the paper, the Bibliography is the intellectual brain. Each source from which you obtain your information must be documented on this page. Citing sources and giving due credit to those sources is indispensable in the creation of your work.
(HINT: Names, dates and places which you could not have known without the contribution of another demands footnoting to give credit to that source). Authors are presented in alphabetical order in the following format. Last name of author, first name of author, title of the work (underlined or italicized), publisher’s name, where published and date of copyright. Whenever a title is used, in content or bibliography, the title should be underlined or italicized, consistently, i.e., use one or the other, never both. The name of the author should be flush with the left margin of the page. Subsequent lines should be indented 5 spaces. When using more than one author, the abbreviation et.al. (meaning “and others”) should be used. There are a number of citing examples in Turabian when quoting newspapers, articles in periodicals, Congressional laws and court cases, but the book quote is sufficient for our purposes. In the Research Paper, a minimum of four sources (one primary minimum) is required. A primary source would be an eyewitness to the event, an autobiography, or an account that took place when the event occurred. A secondary source would be a later writing about an event such as a biography or a textbook. Avoid the use of an encyclopedia as a reference or as a secondary source.

Evolution vs. Intelligent Design (ID)
Conventionally minded Americans hardly applaud Hollywood products. However, the film “Expelled” is an exception. That Charles Darwin’s evolution theory transformed the Western culture is undisputable. The Bible insisted that life forms are God’s creations, with human being the focus, designed in God’s own image. Charles Darwin introduced a new theory: random chemical interactions created life, and that human beings were animals who gradually evolved from lower forms of life to become the complex creatures they are today.  Evolution has long received the support of many scientists. Now, however, Intelligent Design (ID) has Darwin’s evolution theory on the retreat.
            Scientists refer to a system whose internal workings are not known as “black box”. To Darwin and his proponents, the living cell was likened to a black box since its elementary mechanisms were totally obscure[1]. Today, it is known that distant from being shaped from a type of simple protoplasm as nineteenth-century scientists thought, the living cell is made up of ultra-complicated molecular machines. A single cell that Darwin conceptualized as “simple” is programmed and encoded with vast information, which would fill hundreds of books, and is too sophisticated to have formed at random. In his 1996 controversial book, Darwin’s Black Box, biochemist Michael Behe shows that specific biochemical systems like the immune system and blood clotting, are “irreducibly sophisticated”—explicitly, they are made up of interdependent components, which cannot function at lesser stages, and therefore, cannot have gradually evolved[2]. Behe’s studies concluded that Darwin’s evolution theory fails to explain a plethora of biochemical reactions, which occur in the cell and that only ID can. Though Behe assiduously desisted from identifying the designer, the pervasive understanding is that the designer is God.  His hypothesized proof that the living cell did not form through evolution as proposed by Darwin, generated intense criticisms from evolution proponents.  Unlike religious proponents of creationism who poke holes into evolution, Behe holds a Ph.D. in Biochemistry and is a Professor at a renowned university.  Moreover, Behe’s book is well written, smartly argued, and demonstrates his apparent expertise in the area of biochemistry. 
            Evolution implies many things major change over a long period of time, or minor changes in existing species—no sane person doubts this. However, the issue is Darwinism—that all living things evolved from a common ancestor by some undirected processes like natural selection acting upon minor variations. Often, Darwinists confuse the problem by beginning with the non-contentious meanings of evolution theory and then slithering into their more contentious assertions.   According to ID, it is possible for one to deduce from existing evidence within nature that certain aspects of the world—like some aspects of living things— are better explained by ID than by undirected natural processes[3]. ID does not assert that everything was designed, nor does it assert that everything was perfectly designed. Furthermore, ID does not disclose the nature of the designer—it is only that people guess that the designer was God. Since Darwin and his proponents argue that all facets of living things can be explicitly explained by undirected natural mechanisms, and ID proponents assert that some aspects are explained better by an intelligent cause, there exists a contradictory conflict between the two theories. Currently, Darwin’s evolution is winning on the legal, media, and political fronts in the U.S. Most public schools and institutions of higher learning teach evolution as if it was a conclusive fact—the reality is that a rising number of scientists are questioning the theory on evidential basis. Information obtained from genome projects reveals that fundamental inconsistencies in the evolution assertion that all organisms have a common ancestor, yet no person has observed the evolution of a new species—not even the origin of new body plans and organs—by selection and variation[4]. The evidence for ID, on the other hand, is increasing, and sooner or later, ID will win.
            Deciding whether natural selection accounts for the startling intricacy that exists particularly at the molecular level has raised controversy. Even Darwin himself doubted his theory when he acknowledged that if it could be shown that any sophisticated organ existed that could not probably have been produced by many, successive, minor modifications, his theory would completely disintegrate[5]. Irreducibly sophisticated systems seem very unlikely to be formed by various, successive, minor alterations of prior systems, since any antecedent, which was missing a vital component could not function. Since natural selection can only select among systems which are already functioning, the existence of irreducibly sophisticated biological systems in nature poses a prevailing challenge to the theory of evolution. Frequently, such biological systems are observed in living cell organelles, where the elimination of one component would cause the entire system to stop functioning—bacteria’s flagella are perfect
CLICK HERE FOR HELP ON THIS PAPER…………………….
[1] Michael, Behe J., Darwin’s Black Box: The Biochemical Challenge to Evolution, 2nd Edition. (New York:  Free Press, 2006), 37.
[2] Ibid., 38.

[3] Ibid., 59.
[4] Sherri, Gordon M., The Evolution Debate: Darwinism vs. Intelligent Design (Berkeley Heights: Enslow Publishers, 2009), 79-80
[5]Charles, Darwin, The Autobiography of Charles Darwin, Edited by Francis Darwin (Jackson Mahr: New York, 2010), 13.

Evolution vs. intellengent design


CLICK HERE FOR HELP ON THIS PAPER……………………. 
Paper instructions:
Instructions:

The paper is to be submitted in Safe Assign.  It should be 3-5 pages, double-spaced.  You should discuss Evolution versus Intelligent Design. You should include a bibliography page as well.  A good starting point for the paper may be a film or concise article.  Ben Stein’s “Expelled” includes interviews with people on either side of the debate.  Pay special attention to the names and sources he cites in the video to serve as a springboard for additional research.  Develop your own opinion and support that opinion with factual data, NOT “well I think it is.”  Use scientific, authoritative sources to validate your conclusions.  If you think evolution is a valid theory, cite scientists who believe in this theory and organize your paper around the information.  If you believe in intelligent design, use factual data to support your conclusions and create a well developed paper arguing your conclusion.  DO NOT PLAGARIZE!  If you have any questions or don’t know where to start, I have a copy of the Stein movie and the library has various other sources.  I will be glad to help in any way with the document.
Documentation should utilize Turabian style citations.  Please see attached for examples, instructions, etc.
CLICK HERE FOR HELP ON THIS PAPER…………………….
Paper Requirements
Each discipline of a college requires specific styles to formalize submitted papers. English Departments usually require MLA-style. Psychology students are instructed in APA-style. Social Science Departments most often use Turabian-Chicago style. As History is a Social Science, we will utilize the Turabian-Chicago style.
While you are not writing a research paper, it does require documentation of sources.  The Paper must be at least 3 pages long, both double-spaced, with Ariel or Times New Roman fonts, and a pitch of 12. Each page, except for the first page, must be numbered in Arabic style, (2, 3, 4, 5), on the top line of the page, on the right margin, one-inch from the top of the paper, 3 lines above the first line of text on the page.  Each page requires a one-inch margin on the top, bottom, and both sides. Use left-justification only (right-justification would result in additional spaces which would be counted against your grade), double-spaced throughout, and pay particular attention to grammar, composition, spelling, and spacing between letters and after punctuation. Use spell-checker software on your computer or the dictionary for words not resident in your spell-checker. Use correct punctuation and spacing between punctuation marks, (i.e., one space after a semi-colon, two spaces after a colon).
Avoid using unacceptable fonts or increased spacing to expand your paper to reach minimum requirements. Do NOT change your font/size/color on this paper, but use the same throughout your work to present a professional and consistent work. This will be an obvious attempt to circumvent requirements and dealt with appropriately.
The first page of the Paper must begin with your name, the instructor’s name, the course and the date on the left hand margin of the paper, double-spaced.  You must separate the title from the work with 2 lines. Each paragraph must be indented by 5 spaces. The second page of text and each additional page must begin one-inch below the top of the page. The first page is not numbered, but each page from Page 2 is numbered consecutively, right-justified at the top of the page (only pages of text are numbered).
While the Content Pages are the heart of the paper, the Bibliography is the intellectual brain. Each source from which you obtain your information must be documented on this page. Citing sources and giving due credit to those sources is indispensable in the creation of your work.
(HINT: Names, dates and places which you could not have known without the contribution of another demands footnoting to give credit to that source). Authors are presented in alphabetical order in the following format. Last name of author, first name of author, title of the work (underlined or italicized), publisher’s name, where published and date of copyright. Whenever a title is used, in content or bibliography, the title should be underlined or italicized, consistently, i.e., use one or the other, never both. The name of the author should be flush with the left margin of the page. Subsequent lines should be indented 5 spaces. When using more than one author, the abbreviation et.al. (meaning “and others”) should be used. There are a number of citing examples in Turabian when quoting newspapers, articles in periodicals, Congressional laws and court cases, but the book quote is sufficient for our purposes. In the Research Paper, a minimum of four sources (one primary minimum) is required. A primary source would be an eyewitness to the event, an autobiography, or an account that took place when the event occurred. A secondary source would be a later writing about an event such as a biography or a textbook. Avoid the use of an encyclopedia as a reference or as a secondary source.

Evolution vs. Intelligent Design (ID)
Conventionally minded Americans hardly applaud Hollywood products. However, the film “Expelled” is an exception. That Charles Darwin’s evolution theory transformed the Western culture is undisputable. The Bible insisted that life forms are God’s creations, with human being the focus, designed in God’s own image. Charles Darwin introduced a new theory: random chemical interactions created life, and that human beings were animals who gradually evolved from lower forms of life to become the complex creatures they are today.  Evolution has long received the support of many scientists. Now, however, Intelligent Design (ID) has Darwin’s evolution theory on the retreat.
            Scientists refer to a system whose internal workings are not known as “black box”. To Darwin and his proponents, the living cell was likened to a black box since its elementary mechanisms were totally obscure[1]. Today, it is known that distant from being shaped from a type of simple protoplasm as nineteenth-century scientists thought, the living cell is made up of ultra-complicated molecular machines. A single cell that Darwin conceptualized as “simple” is programmed and encoded with vast information, which would fill hundreds of books, and is too sophisticated to have formed at random. In his 1996 controversial book, Darwin’s Black Box, biochemist Michael Behe shows that specific biochemical systems like the immune system and blood clotting, are “irreducibly sophisticated”—explicitly, they are made up of interdependent components, which cannot function at lesser stages, and therefore, cannot have gradually evolved[2]. Behe’s studies concluded that Darwin’s evolution theory fails to explain a plethora of biochemical reactions, which occur in the cell and that only ID can. Though Behe assiduously desisted from identifying the designer, the pervasive understanding is that the designer is God.  His hypothesized proof that the living cell did not form through evolution as proposed by Darwin, generated intense criticisms from evolution proponents.  Unlike religious proponents of creationism who poke holes into evolution, Behe holds a Ph.D. in Biochemistry and is a Professor at a renowned university.  Moreover, Behe’s book is well written, smartly argued, and demonstrates his apparent expertise in the area of biochemistry. 
            Evolution implies many things major change over a long period of time, or minor changes in existing species—no sane person doubts this. However, the issue is Darwinism—that all living things evolved from a common ancestor by some undirected processes like natural selection acting upon minor variations. Often, Darwinists confuse the problem by beginning with the non-contentious meanings of evolution theory and then slithering into their more contentious assertions.   According to ID, it is possible for one to deduce from existing evidence within nature that certain aspects of the world—like some aspects of living things— are better explained by ID than by undirected natural processes[3]. ID does not assert that everything was designed, nor does it assert that everything was perfectly designed. Furthermore, ID does not disclose the nature of the designer—it is only that people guess that the designer was God. Since Darwin and his proponents argue that all facets of living things can be explicitly explained by undirected natural mechanisms, and ID proponents assert that some aspects are explained better by an intelligent cause, there exists a contradictory conflict between the two theories. Currently, Darwin’s evolution is winning on the legal, media, and political fronts in the U.S. Most public schools and institutions of higher learning teach evolution as if it was a conclusive fact—the reality is that a rising number of scientists are questioning the theory on evidential basis. Information obtained from genome projects reveals that fundamental inconsistencies in the evolution assertion that all organisms have a common ancestor, yet no person has observed the evolution of a new species—not even the origin of new body plans and organs—by selection and variation[4]. The evidence for ID, on the other hand, is increasing, and sooner or later, ID will win.

            Deciding whether natural selection accounts for the startling intricacy that exists particularly at the molecular level has raised controversy. Even Darwin himself doubted his theory when he acknowledged that if it could be shown that any sophisticated organ existed that could not probably have been produced by many, successive, minor modifications, his theory would completely disintegrate[5]. Irreducibly sophisticated systems seem very unlikely to be formed by various, successive, minor alterations of prior systems, since any antecedent, which was missing a vital component could not function. Since natural selection can only select among systems which are already functioning, the existence of irreducibly sophisticated biological systems in nature poses a prevailing challenge to the theory of evolution. Frequently, such biological systems are observed in living cell organelles, where the elimination of one component would cause the entire system to stop functioning—bacteria’s flagella are perfect

CLICK HERE FOR HELP ON THIS PAPER…………………….

[1] Michael, Behe J., Darwin’s Black Box: The Biochemical Challenge to Evolution, 2nd Edition. (New York:  Free Press, 2006), 37.
[2] Ibid., 38.
[3] Ibid., 59.
[4] Sherri, Gordon M., The Evolution Debate: Darwinism vs. Intelligent Design (Berkeley Heights: Enslow Publishers, 2009), 79-80
[5]Charles, Darwin, The Autobiography of Charles Darwin, Edited by Francis Darwin (Jackson Mahr: New York, 2010), 13.

Click here to have a similar A+ quality paper

Order Now