Which of the following is/are true regarding evolution?

Question

a. Evolution is a passive process.
b. Individuals evolve.
c. All of the choices are true.
d. Organisms evolve structures because of need.
e. Evolution is deliberate and purposeful.

I think the answer is c. Just wanted to check. Thanks.

Answer 1

I would say a or e.
a : because random events can have a role in evolution (natural selection) even though sexual selection is more deliberate and purposeful, however it is more passive than deliberate because creatures don't consciously think of evolving certain characteristics.

note: populations evolve, not individuals, and organisms don't evolve structures because of future use (example: feathers weren't selected for flight but for insulation, however they later came in handy for flight).

Answer 2

A is true - evolution is a passive process. It's a matter of which ones happen to have the right characteristics to survive.

Not B - individuals keep the characteristics they have. They either have useful characteristics or they don't.

Not D - structures are kept if they are useful, but organisms can't just evolve structures that they need.

Not E - evolution is a process of keeping random changes that are useful. The changes don't pop up because they will be useful.

Answer 3

I'd say A.

I checked some sites for a good definition of evolution... From the TalkOrigins Archive site, I got this definition:

[[One of the most respected evolutionary biologists has defined biological evolution as follows:

"In the broadest sense, evolution is merely change, and so is all-pervasive; galaxies, languages, and political systems all evolve. Biological evolution ... is change in the properties of populations of organisms that transcend the lifetime of a single individual. The ontogeny of an individual is not considered evolution; individual organisms do not evolve. The changes in populations that are considered evolutionary are those that are inheritable via the genetic material from one generation to the next. Biological evolution may be slight or substantial; it embraces everything from slight changes in the proportion of different alleles within a population (such as those determining blood types) to the successive alterations that led from the earliest protoorganism to snails, bees, giraffes, and dandelions."
- Douglas J. Futuyma in Evolutionary Biology, Sinauer Associates 1986

It is important to note that biological evolution refers to populations and not to individuals and that the changes must be passed on to the next generation. In practice this means that,
Evolution is a process that results in heritable changes in a population spread over many generations. ]]

This definition definitely makes choice B false. Since B is false, then choice C is also definitely false. Choices D and E are basically just two different ways of saying the same thing.

Answer 4

It's a.

a. It's not clear what's meant by 'passive process' ... but I interpret this to mean that it is a process that occurs as a side-effect of other processes (namely survival).

b. Definitely NOT true. An individual does not evolve. It's always a population (like a species).

c. Nope. Can't be true if some of the other choices are false.

d. Nope. A structure does not develop because of need. E.g. whales could sure use some gills, but that is not enough reason for them to evolve.

e. Definitely not. Evolution is NOT deliberate and purposeful. It has no "goal."

Answer 5

because of the fact evolution and technology are demonstrably actual, there is not any "blind following" so your tu quoque attack is bunk. coffee is the two stable and undesirable for you. of course technology of the previous isn't as precise as technology of as we communicate. that is using the fact technology isn't dogma, that is continuously shifting forward, getting extra precise. "What i'm asserting is that many atheists love technology a lot" because of the fact those atheists are atheists because of the fact they're severe thinkers and realists. Atheism in our case is an results of our skeptical inquiry, and technology is the tactic of skeptical inquiry that is utilized to the observable universe. "...yet do no longer understand that that is typically unsuitable..." There you bypass back, making use of words you do no longer understand. technology isn't unsuitable. Our present day medical wisdom is unquestionably incomplete, whether that's the *maximum suitable* of our wisdom. And our destiny, extra precise wisdom would be equipped upon it. whilst there is new medical information, the old information isn't thoroughly abrogated such as you human beings do once you chanced on new religions. "... we ought to continually no longer have self assurance each little thing they let us know" of course you could no longer have self assurance each little thing human beings inform you. that is an argument from authority, that's a logical fallacy. that may no longer technology. technology _demonstrates_, that is not any longer dogma. perhaps you could have spent extra time paying interest interior the lecture room than to the propagandist on the pulpit. "Evolution isn't pragmatic. It enables us in no way thinking that we got here from a user-friendly ancestor with monkeys." All of biology and medicine relies on the information of evolution. shall we no longer attempt medicine on animals if we did no longer share a user-friendly ancestor. we've new flu vaccines each 3 hundred and sixty 5 days because of the fact the flue evolves. So particular, information evolution *is* pragmatic. Pretending that individuals are created from clay that some god sneezed into isn't. and that we ought to continually no longer have self assurance each little thing they let us know.

Answer 6

E