Essay Writing Service | Essay Writer for All Kinds of Papers

An essay that is critical of the literal interpretation of Genesis and is supportive of evolution.

How We Survived Two Years of Hell As Hostages in …

microevolution + time + isolation + selection pressure + changing environment = macroevolutionThese ideas were discussed at the 1980 Chicago Conference on Macroevolution. For more information, please see the Roger Lewin article "Evolutionary Theory Under Fire", Volume 210, 21 November 1980, pp 883-887.We have transitional fossils, despite the creationist claim that "there are no transitional fossils". We have transitional fossils for humans, too, in spite of the claim that "there are no ape-men." (see Time magazine, August 23, 1999; "How Man Evolved", by Michael Lemonick and Andrea Dorfman, pp. 54-55). The References section of this essay contains links to transitional fossils, including some with pictures.It is puzzling that transitional fossils are more rare than we would expect. I think that paleontologist Stephen Jay Gould is on the right track with his theory of evolution through Punctuated Equilibrium. This theory states that major changes occur locally in an isolated population, so that fossils are more rare than would be expected by the slow, stately progress of change predicted by Charles Darwin. Punctuated Equilibrium is not just an excuse for finding no transitional fossils, because many such fossils have been found. Transitional forms are found locally for certain animals, and outside the "evolution zone" the transition looks quite abrupt because of migration of the new and displacement of the original species.When I look at the flowers in our front garden I marvel at the pistils and stamens, and at the mechanism for pollination and reproduction. It startles me that such a thing could arise simply from natural selection through mutation, in just a billion years. We have examples of change in moths, finches, people, and bacteria, but these examples are kind of unsatisfying in comparison to the great variety of form that we see in nature. Is there more to it?I realize that my life-span of about 80 years is so short that I cannot properly comprehend a million years, let along a billion. My common sense is simply not equipped to make a proper analysis of the time span required to produce a moon flower, or a bird, or a human.I think the "not enough time" problem bothers atheists more than it bothers me. I believe that God directs the processes that we call "random", and that He can engineer an unlikely event according to His plan. With God Almighty in charge, the unlikely becomes certain. I would be more comfortable with a theory that includes proper statistical measures, but I do not require it. Atheists require it.Certain recent evidence indicates just the opposite of what our common sense tells us. It appears that evolution actually occurs much faster than we would expect from natural selection through random mutation alone. Punctuated Equilibrium takes advantage of this difference by proposing that local changes occur rapidly in a small population under survival pressure.This is an unsolved puzzle. The mechanism that drives evolution is something for future biologists to research and figure out. I think that the mechanism is more complex than just natural selection through random mutation. However, I don't believe this to be an enormously difficult puzzle. Scientists finished decoding the human genome in June 2000, and further analysis should provide some answers. We don't know exactly how mutations occur, although that marvelous DNA structure seems to favor viability when it reproduces.The term "Pre-Cambrian Explosion" refers to the sudden emergence of complex life forms after millions of years of single-celled creatures. How did evolution produce a sudden burst of advanced complexity? How does a paramecium become a trilobite in such a short time? This is a bigger puzzle for evolutionary theory. I thought that perhaps this big jump could be explained by the development of sexual reproduction over single-parent reproduction, until someone directed me to another development.Geologists have recently found evidence that something very strange happened to the earth right at the Pre-Cambrian boundary. Discoveries like this make science exciting! It appears that a global freeze suddenly gave way to a very hot period. This abrupt change must have had something to do with the sudden explosion of life forms, but what? The researchers suppose that isolation and selection pressure during that event produced an "evolution engine" capable of great leaps in a short space of time. But the details, the mechanism, and the verification are still anybody's guess.A gap in does not prove the existence of God. We are not at the end of science, or history, until Jesus returns in person.The biggest mystery of biology is the emergence of the first life forms from the "soupy seas". This problem is not strictly of the field of evolution, but of biogenesis instead. It is a related field, so I will discuss it here.A biologist named Stanley Miller has done amazing experiments with lightning that produce amino acids from simple carbon compounds and water. Beyond that, biologists are fairly confident that they can develop a reasonable progression from RNA to DNA, then up through single-celled organisms to multi-celled creatures, and onward to the plant and animal kingdoms. However, the gap between amino acids and RNA remains a mystery.Various mechanisms have been proposed to cross this gap (lightning, solar energy, comets, etc.). However, even the most reasonable mechanisms are extremely unlikely to have produced life on this earth in the space of 3 billion years, according to the latest analyses.As noted earlier, the small probabilities here bother me less than they would bother an atheist, because I believe in more than just a tinkering God. I believe in a God who knows and cares for even the sparrows (Matthew 10: 29-31). Yahweh is always directing and caring for His creation. He does not show up only when evolution needs a boost. Jesus Christ is with us always, even to the end of the age (Matthew 28: 20).I would like to discover a sound scientific treatment of the amino acid - RNA gap, because I believe that science allows us to reveal the marvels of God's creation. Until then, here is how I shall answer the question."I don't know. Only God Almighty knows."I realize that this is not a good answer among men. But it was a good answer for the prophet Ezekiel (37: 3), and it will be good enough for me.There are some non-scriptural objections to evolution that I have heard from Christians:1. Cruelty of Evolution"Evolution is cruel, wasteful, and inefficient; God would not accomplish His creation that way."With regard to "wasteful and inefficient", I have not seen a Bible verse that states that God's ways are waste-free and efficient according to the judgment of 21st-century Americans. In contrast, God's ways often look wasteful and inefficient in man's eyes. For example, consider the parable of the vineyard workers in Matthew 20: 1-16. The vineyard owner wasted his money on the workers hired to work for only the last hour. But God does not call this waste and inefficiency. He calls it grace and mercy.The creation of the dinosaurs would seem like a waste of time on the way to creating mankind. They ruled the earth for millions of years and then were wiped out pretty suddenly. Why did God bother to create them? One may ask the same question in the field of astronomy. The other galaxies besides our Milky Way are magnificent to look at through powerful telescopes. But we won't get the chance to make much use of them, unless Jesus' return is a lot farther off than most people think. Why did God bother to create all those extra galaxies? One would have been plenty.The charge of cruelty is another matter. Where does the Bible say that the working out of God's plan here on earth never involves cruelty? There is plenty of cruelty in the coming of Jesus Christ:I know that God is not cruel. When I see cruelty in this world, I look for an explanation involving our sin, not God's intention."Survival of the fittest is cruel. Death is cruel. God would not design his creation that way."There are some places in the Bible where apparent cruelty is recorded, and man's sin cannot reasonably be the cause.It strikes me as very presumptuous to claim to know the mind of God Almighty, to know His designs and to know what He judges to be cruel and what to be kind. Isaiah 55: 8-9 compares our intellect to God's: "This plan of mine is not what you would work out, neither are my thoughts the same as yours! For just as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than yours, and my thoughts higher than yours."Perhaps God created the process of evolution as a way for life to survive the natural calamities that He knew would come, such as the meteorite impact at Chicxulub in Mexico's Yucatan Penninsula that is thought to have wiped out the dinosaurs 65 million years ago. A remnant of the animals (mammals, birds) apparently did survive and went on to re-populate the earth. This view is consistent with the story of Sodom and Gomorrah in Genesis 18-19, where a remnant is saved because of God's mercy. (If you want to know why God sent or allowed the Chixculub meteorite in the first place when there was no sin of mankind to destroy, you'll have to ask Him when you get to heaven. I plan to. The same question applies to present-day hurricanes, floods, earthquakes, volcanic eruptions, and other natural disasters.) This view asserts that evolution is not God's ideal process for creating life, but instead evolution is God's way of providing for life to survive and thrive in a difficult and dangerous universe. Life on earth has indeed survived for many millions of years despite the worst that satan could throw at it. The universe is good - good enough for us to marvel at along with the Psalmist. But God's ideal arrangement for life is . . . heaven!Albert Einstein followed what he thought to be God's perfect simplicity in relativity. After many scientific successes, he reached a dead end when confronted with the unavoidable complexities of quantum mechanics. Each time he read a new modern theory, he rejected it with the words "If I were God, I would not have designed it that way." Finally Niels Bohr advised him to stop telling God what to do.St. Paul gives a long warning against criticizing the ways of God in Romans 9: 9-24. He gives examples from Biblical history, then denies our right to conclude that God was unfair or unkind. Note especially verse 20: "No, don't say that. Who are you to criticize God? Should the thing made say to the one who made it, 'Why have you made me like this?'"God chose a certain method to spread the Gospel message: Tell people, and then those people will tell other people, and so on. We humans could easily conclude that this method is cruel and inefficient by looking at human history. Jesus Himself was crucified for spreading the message this way. St. Stephen, St. Paul, and all the Apostles except for St. John are thought to have suffered violent deaths for spreading the Gospel message. We can see that this method is inefficient because 2,000 years later there are still people in the world who have not heard about Jesus. Some people have heard the message so poorly communicated that thay are not inclined to accept it. Yet we do not deny that God chose to use this method to spread the Good News of salvation through Jesus Christ. Neither can we conclude that God did not use evolution because to us it seems cruel and inefficient. If you do not accept evolution as being from God, then I suppose you have one fewer "God-is-cruel" scenario to wrestle with. But it is a mistake to say, "In my judgment this process is cruel, so therefore God must not have permitted this process to occur."2. Common Sense"The idea that we all crawled out of the mud is contrary to common sense."So is the idea that we are living on a little globe spinning around a sun through empty space. But here we are.3. Random Chance Creating Order"You could shake up a bunch of watch parts in a bucket all day long and never get a watch."I've never met anyone who has tried shaking up those watch parts for a million years, or even for 10,000 years. I don't think the mechanism is the same, anyway.4. Evolution and Christian Faith are Incompatible"Theistic evolution is sitting on the fence. Pick one or the other."So is theistic meteorology sitting on the fence, but most Christians believe in it. God sends rain according to His plan, but water evaporates from the oceans and falls out of clouds as rain. They are both true. There is no conflict. Even Elijah knew that clouds were a sign of rain, although it was God who directed them (1 Kings 18:44).5. Theistic Evolution is a CompromiseMy dictionary defines a compromise as "a settlement of differences by arbitration or by consent reached by mutual concessions". There is the additional implication that these concessions are bad because we don't want to give up part of the Bible. Certainly we do not! So let's look at what we give up in the alleged "compromise" of theistic evolution. So - theistic evolution does not fit the definition of a compromise because we don't have to give up anything that is truly of value to our faith. Now let's look at what we gain. 6. Evolution is Not "Very Good" In Genesis 1:31 God looks over all that He has made: "And God saw every thing that He had made, and behold, it was very good." This verse is used to contend that evolution cannot be part of God's plan because natural selection, the survival of the fittest, cannot be "very good" in God's eyes. Creationists quote a fragment of the very last paragraph of Darwin's book as evidence that evolution is not very good: "...the war of nature, from famine and death...".

save our mother earth essay image search results. Impulsiveness is one eight-teen of merchandising the mother earth essay of daresay can give to our people.

When it comes to essay writing, an in-depth research is a big deal

On the issue of environmentalism, Islam really does not address it explicitly in the modern discourse. Thus this essay is not about recycling, nor about greenhouse gases, nor about pollution. Its not about preservation, nor conservation. The religion of Islam is not about these things. The traditional texts won't address the issue of the environment in these terms, most likely because these are new terms.

However, we do find in the Quran, in many verses, the concept that God, Allah in Arabic, has subjugated the Earth for our use. We need to pay attention here, it was subjugated to us for our use, not our abuse. The current trend in the world towards the earth is abusive. The phenomena of global warming, the destruction of many ecosystems, the deforestation of many old growth forest lands, the polluting of the earth's oceans, the growing number of species becoming extinct or endangered, and the ever growing hole in the ozone layer of the atmosphere are all indications of abuse.

The first question that comes to my mind is 'why?'. Why are the humans being abusive to the earth? To understand this abusive behavior, it would help to study the history of the human belief system. Belief, or following a faith, is a critical element in a human's psyche and behavior. If we look back to the 19th century, we find a group of post-modern philosophers who had the idea that 'God did not create Man, but Man created God'. In other words God was a creation of man's intellect to answer the unanswerable questions that man had. In essence what was taking place was that God was being forsaken. The early part of the 19th century also ushered in an acceleration of science and a new understanding of the physical world. In other words, God and religion in general were being forsaken for the material world. Traditional religions like Islam, Christianity, and Judaism were being traded in for the New Religion of Science appearing on the horizon, with its gang of new priests, the Scientists.

This new religion was unraveling the mysteries of our world. New theories were developed and then an entire process was developed to prove or disprove these theories and once proved they were taken as "gospel", the Truth, etc They learned how to harness the powers of the Natural Laws that were put in place by the Creator Himself with out acknowledging the fact that it was the Creator who gave us the ability to reason in that very manner. This new religion, in the hands of people like Darwin, even went as far as to say that there was no Creator at all. That we were just an accident that took place in a puddle somewhere. That with a random spark of electricity and some pond slime we started to evolve and transform ourselves into this thinking, feeling, articulating creatures that could balance and walk on two feet.

This trend lasted until the middle of the 20th century when man, in his arrogance, thinking that he had conquered the world and everything in it began to forsake the material world for the material alone. No longer was man interested in the workings of the natural world. No longer was man in awe of the intricacies of the world and the universe. Humans were only interested in how can we now use what we know of the natural laws for our own personal benefit. Thus the abuse of the earth started in the pursuit of one thing, Wealth. Nothing else mattered.

So now, we as human beings are simply trashing the earth where ever we go. We leave a wake of destruction and decimation as we rape the earth of her resources and we don't even care. How do we remedy this disease in our hearts? How do we stop the abusive raping of the earth?

The first step is to realize how we arrived at our present state. First God was forsaken, then the Earth was forsaken. Both were forsaken for things that are more ephemeral than the object forsaken for. The wealth that we pursue now and our selves will perish long before the Earth ever will and the earth will perish also. Only God will last forever. Second is to realize that the Earth is a creation of God. And because of that, we need to realize that it is sacred. Just like all other creations, each holds a sanctity that cannot be violated.

The Prophet Muhammad, peace and blessings of God upon him said, "The earth is your Mother, so take care of your Mother". The earth is our mother. We are made from the same substances found in the earth. We learn from revelation that God created the human from clay, a mixture of earth and water. The earth, our mother, feeds us from her grains, fruits, greens and animals. We drink from the water that springs forth from deep within her bosoms, and her tears that fall from the sky. And just like the relationship that we have with our human mothers, we need to listen to Mother Earth. We need to respond to her needs and take care of her as the Prophet Muhammad, peace and blessings of God upon him, commanded.

But when we look around today, we are left asking, does anyone care? Do we take care of our Mother, the Earth? Most of the people who inhabit the earth today do not care. Some appear to care. Some organizations appear to be on a mission to save the earth from an ecological catastrophe. I say appear because when one examines these groups in detail and with a discriminating eye, one finds that they really only care about themselves. They see the destruction of the earth's resources (translated: wealth) and the over population of the world (translated: consuming the resources) a threat to there own existence and nothing more. To combat this trend of abuse to the earth, they use a means of violence that endangers themselves and others as well as the earth in some cases. In their wanton attempt to save themselves from extinction, and we will all die at some point, they destroy the property of others. This only forces the expenditure of more resources in reconstructing what was damaged in the first place. One organization in particular touts itself as an organization dedicated to preserving the earth and encourages conservation and recycling etc However, upon examining the tenets of this organization we find that it lobbies the Congress of the United States to curtail the immigration from other countries in to the U.S. Why? Looking deeper, we find that it also supports birth and population control programs. Why? This organization is worried about only one thing, the expenditure of resources. In other words 'too many people on the land translates to not enough wealth for the rest of us'. On the surface, this organization appears to be fighting to save the earth, but deep down, they are only worried about their own existence.

I fail to mention the names of these organizations for a very good reason, they have a noble mission. I do not want to see that mission jeopardized. I have the same mission, to re-establish the balance between the Earth and the humans. I am critical of the means by which these organizations attempt to fulfill their mission, not in the mission itself. The problem that they all suffer is sincerity of intention. Before we can save the earth, we have to care about the earth. We need to act out of compassion and mercy for the earth, not out of fear and anger over our own eminent demise or fear of poverty.

Continued in Part 2

Fighting For My Daughter: An Essay From Tamika Fuller

Those energy concepts are real ones that all economies face, and financial measures only reflect them. In the USA, just , Peak Oil was . In 1973, the first oil crisis hit, and have declined since then. Wages were only a reflection of energy consumption, which also peaked in the 1970s for the USA and by that real wages per hour have. The USA’s declining standard of living since the 1970s was minor compared to the devastation inflicted on developing nations. The was initiated by the oil price shocks of the 1970s. Many nations have yet to recover. When the oil price shocks hit, and other measures were inflicted by Western institutions on developing nations. As people such as , those policies were intentionally used to enslave those nations. On the world stage, the self-image promoted by the West is that of blundering do-gooders. As people such as , it is a false narrative designed to hide corrupt motivation from the outset. It is simply more of that . I have written a great deal elsewhere on , how the resembles fairy tales, how professions and industries have , how the , just like genocidal invasions, were always economically motivated, usually to secure energy resources. This essay does not need to belabor those trends, but anybody not can clearly see that the game being played on the global stage is the same one that has been played: economically exploiting others. Because industrialized civilization is beginning to run out of the energy sources that the West used to industrialize, a universal decline in humanity’s standard of living has begun. The USA has transitioned from the land of opportunity to a deindustrializing economy in which bankers and other capitalists are designed to rob one class in favor of another. The aspect of those machinations is painfully obvious. The mind-control techniques that Orwell and Huxley wrote about have been turned into sciences, and there are even “competitions” between their dystopian visions to see .

A Personal Essay From Tamika Fuller…Fighting For My Daughter: Power, Wealth, And Hip-Hop