Evolution Vs. Fossil Records - 912 Words

Evolution has been a widely known discussion that many people have had over the past century, the theory of evolution has been welcomed by many scientists yet by some religious people it has been a taboo topic. The thought or the motion to entertain that humans evolved from primates is what some people would shudder and state that it goes against all their religious beliefs. However, scientist have pushed on the fact that evolution is not just a hypothetical or an outlandish theory but a theory that has multiple hard evidence to back it and that to ignore is ignorance and just plain stupidity. Four types of evidence of evolution are fossil records, genetic changes, the geographic distribution of species, and the similarities in embryos of species. One of the evidences of evolution is fossil records, with fossil records being the remains of plants and animals that scientist have found in sedimentary rocks. Fossil records have given us irrefutable evidence of evolution in the past, ov er a course of a long period of time, proving there is significant variation amongst living things. Evolution is a continuum; all the minor changes over a period of time add up to a major change. On the continuum, fossils are the points that displaying what the organism had become after evolving at that stage in time. Although fossil records are substantial evidence for evolution there are gaps in the fossil records due to the fact of incompletion of the collecting data. As evolution isShow MoreRelatedUsing Fossil Records to Compare Evolution and Creationism807 Words   |  3 PagesFossil Records: Evolution vs. Creation Defined in Biology, evolution is as a change in allele frequencies of a population. To more simply express, a change in the genetic coding (DNA) of a group of organisms. These changes can be as simple as eye or hair color, and as complex has the development of limb and finger bones as seen in evolution of fish to land-roaming tetrapods (Tiktaalik roseae). A strong factor supporting evolution is the history of life as documented by fossils, known as the fossilRead More Evolution: Just More Proof of God1178 Words   |  5 PagesEvolution: Just More Proof of God      Ã‚   The world around us changes. This simple fact is obvious everywhere we look. Streams wash dirt and stones from higher places to lower places. Untended gardens fill with weeds.   - National Academy of Sciences    Humans are inquisitive creatures. Throughout the centuries, we have thought, Why are we here? This one question has brought thousands of answers. Once Gods and Goddesses reigned. The many hands of Tishri and Buddha, Tao, ConfuciusRead MoreCreationism And Evolutionism887 Words   |  4 Pages Creationism Vs Evolutionism The debate between creationism and evolutionism has been a topic of discussion by scientists and religious believers since the 19th century. Since the very first religion such as Hinduism and all that came after, there has been the belief of a higher being, a divine creation more powerful than humans of which has created the world of that we live in. Until 1859, Sir Charles Darwin’s book â€Å"On the Origin of Species† introduced and described a theory based solely onRead MoreEvolution Through the Influence of God1605 Words   |  7 Pagesand Biblical moralities, the intelligent design theory was established to accommodate believers in the divine Christ and the theory of evolution. This group believes that evolution is occurring, but that God created the start of all life. There are three main notions of the origin of life, evolution, creationism, and intelligent design. The first theory, evolution, explains how life on Earth formed and how organisms adapted through generations. Scientists have studied the theory for years and haveRead MoreEvolutionism : The Truth Behind Humans1647 Words   |  7 PagesEvolutionism: The Truth Behind Humans Is the evolution theory a fact or a myth? This is the question I pondered for quite some time as I contemplated on the idea of the origin of human species. Were we created by a higher power or are we descendants of ape like ancestors? Hundreds of articles and substantial proof have helped shape my belief that evolution in fact, does exist. What is evolutionism? The definition of evolution found in an article states that â€Å"evolution is that all life on earth is descendedRead More Evolution vs. Creationism Essay917 Words   |  4 Pages Evolution vs. Creationism The Evolution vs. Creationism controversy goes all the way back to the Publishing of Origin of Species in 1859 by Darwin laying the foundation for the evolution of life to be understood. Scientists are continuously finding more evidence to support Darwin’s conclusion; that organisms descended from a common ancestor modified by the mechanism of natural selection resulting in the evolution of species adapting to their environment. The following are the main geological topicsRead MoreReligion vs. Science Essays730 Words   |  3 PagesReligion vs. Science The human mind is easily convinced on what the eyes tell the mind. If you see something in front of yourself, you might have an easier time believing, than if one was to tell a story. Religion is a story that has been told for thousands of years, and not till technology has ripened have scientists disproved many beliefs. It is now that mankind lets religion restrain the mind from portraying the truth about life. Some people claim that science does notRead More Evolution vs.Creationism Essay987 Words   |  4 Pages Evolution Vs Creationism People have always wondered how life originated and how so many different kinds of plants and animals arose. Stories of a supernatural creation of life developed among many peoples. The Bible, for example, tells of Gods creation of humans and other higher animals over several days. Many people also believed that insects, worms, and other lower creatures spontaneously generated from mud and decay. Long after these stories became rooted in tradition, scientists began toRead More Evolutionism Vs Creationism Essay1050 Words   |  5 Pagescuriosity and imagination as soon as early man had time for activities other than survival. In 1859, Charles Darwin published the Origin of Species, and since then, people have debated between the creationism and evolutionism theories. The theory of evolution has been supported only through various religious writings, particularly the Bible. nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;Creationists believe in a divine creator, God. Creationism has a broad range of beliefs involving a reliance on God’s miraculous workRead MoreThe Debate Between Evolution and Creationism1648 Words   |  7 PagesIf the question was posed as to what is the debate between creationism vs. evolution consist of, the thought that it is ‘â€Å"God did it† vs. â€Å"Natural processes did it,†Ã¢â‚¬â„¢ (Scott, 2004) may arise. Science cannot absolutely prove or disprove Creation or Evolution. Yet scientist and the remainder of society use creationism and evolution to prove our existence. Creationist believe in the Christian account of the origin as recorded in Genesis. Creationism is the belief that statements such as â€Å"In the beginning

What Pilot Studies Are and Why They Matter

A pilot study is a preliminary small-scale study that researchers conduct in order to help them decide how best to conduct a large-scale research project. Using a pilot study, a researcher can identify or refine a research question, figure out what methods are best for pursuing it, and estimate how much time and resources will be necessary to complete the larger version, among other things. Key Takeaways: Pilot Studies Before running a larger study, researchers can conduct a pilot study: a small-scale study that helps them refine their research topic and study methods.Pilot studies can be useful for determining the best research methods to use, troubleshooting unforeseen issues in the project, and determining whether a research project is feasible.Pilot studies can be used in both quantitative and qualitative social science research. Overview Large-scale research projects tend to be complex, take a lot of time to design and execute, and typically require quite a bit of funding. Conducting a pilot study beforehand allows a researcher to design and execute a large-scale project in as methodologically rigorous a way as possible, and can save time and costs by reducing the risk of errors or problems. For these reasons, pilot studies are used by both quantitative and qualitative researchers in the social sciences. Advantages of Conducting a Pilot Study Pilot studies are useful for a number of reasons, including: Identifying or refining a research question or set of questionsIdentifying or refining a hypothesis or set of hypothesesIdentifying and evaluating a sample population, research field site, or data setTesting research instruments like survey questionnaires, interview, discussion guides, or statistical formulasEvaluating and deciding upon research methodsIdentifying and resolving as many potential problems or issues as possibleEstimating the time and costs required for the projectGauging whether the research goals and design are realisticProducing preliminary results that can help secure funding and other forms of institutional investment After conducting a pilot study and taking the steps listed above, a researcher will know what to do in order to proceed in a way that will make the study a success.   Example: Quantitative Survey Research Say you want to conduct a large-scale quantitative research project using survey data to study the relationship between race and political party affiliation. To best design and execute this research, you would first want to select a data set to use, such as the General Social Survey, for example, download one of their data sets, and then use a statistical analysis program to examine this relationship. In the process of analyzing the relationship, you are likely to realize the importance of other variables that may have an impact on political party affiliation. For example, place of residence, age, education level, socioeconomic status, and gender may impact party affiliation (either on their own or in interaction with race). You might also realize that the data set you chose does not offer you all the information that you need to best answer this question, so you might choose to use another data set, or combine another with the original that you selected. Going through this pilot stu dy process will allow you to work out the kinks in your research design and then execute high-quality research. Example: Qualitative Interview Studies Pilot studies can also be useful for qualitative research studies, such as interview-based studies. For example, imagine that a researcher is interested in studying the relationship that Apple consumers have to the companys brand and products. The researcher might choose to first do a pilot study consisting of a couple of focus groups in order to identify questions and thematic areas that would be useful to pursue in-depth, one-on-one interviews. A focus group can be useful to this kind of study because while a researcher will have a notion of what questions to ask and topics to raise, she may find that other topics and questions arise when members of the target group talk among themselves. After a focus group pilot study, the researcher will have a better idea of how to craft an effective interview guide for a larger research project.

The American Tactics of the Revolutionary War Free Essays

string(46) " town and half to the front side of the town\." Most of Europe thought that the British with their immense amount of capital, soldiers and supplies would beat the American resistance in the American revolutionary war without much of an effort. However the Patriots realized, from their earliest difficulties, to capitalize on the enemys weaknesses. Guerrilla warfare and a strategy that emanated from the ability to manipulate events to their own benefit enabled the Americans to defeat the ostensibly more powerful British. We will write a custom essay sample on The American Tactics of the Revolutionary War or any similar topic only for you Order Now The Americans suffered great abuse from their mother country. The British laid upon the Americans heavy taxes between the years 1764 to the middle of 1776. They created such taxes in the Sugar Act, Townshend Act, Tea Act, the Intolerable Acts and many other acts. These acts over the course of the years destroyed much of the faith that Americans had in the British government. The greater portion of the population thought the British were inadequate rulers and that they could do a much better job in ruling themselves. The Americans were tired of the Quartering Act which let British troops be housed in their own homes. They didnt enjoy housing British troops so that their families could be spied upon or have their children raped. The least the Americans thought they deserved was the right to have a representation in Parliament and the right to settle the land over the Appalachian Mountains. If the farmers could have more land to work on, the Americans could have a surplus of food to ship to other countries creating a better economy for the American people. Over the course of about twenty-five years the Americans sent over 500 bills to the British House Of Trade trying to repeal the economic acts that Britain laid down upon them. The Americans also tried to convince the British to let them have the ability to trade with other countries. If the British would have allowed this the common people of American would have been doing better economically; the percent of poor people would have been lowered greatly and the average income would have gone up a great deal. The reason it would have gone up so much is that Britain controlled the prices of products. The British decided how much they would buy a product for from the Americans and charge them two or three times as much to buy it back. All the American people really wanted was to be treated properly. As Thomas Paine said in Common Sense the British treated the Americans like an abusive mother would treat her child. Due to the economic hardships the Americans suffered they knew that they were going to face many problems in the war. The Americans knew that the British had a larger supply of men ranging from more experienced generals to more soldiers. The British had such a surplus of income from all of their colonies that they were able hire and supply mercenaries from Germany to come and fight in America. They had a stronger navy and a lot more artillery than the Americans had. The Americans faced many other disadvantages such as lack of guns, ammunition, food, clothing, and most of all they were heavily outnumbered by men. The British had most advantages except for three main things. The first of all the British had a harder time setting up their supply line because they were so far away from any major base. Their main head quarters was on Long Island. The British had a difficult time setting up a supply line outside of New York and New Jersey to feed, clothe, and keep in contact with their men. The second disadvantage was that the American generals knew the land and terrain where they were fighting a lot better then the British generals did. The American Generals knew how to deal with certain weather issues and turned it to their advantage. The Americans could plan out strategies based on land and terrain rather than sheer numbers, which is how the British tried to deal with the patriots. The third and probably one of the most important British disadvantages that they faced was that the Patriots had more desire to win. The soldiers knew that they were defending their land, their families, and they were protecting their desires. The British soldiers were fighting for what most of them considered to be nothing. Most of the British soldiers were tired of fighting in America and wanted to go home and see their families or create and have a family. The Americans at the beginning of the war tried a certain style of warfare known as Jomini warfare. The two enemies would decide when to have a battle and attack each other. The two enemies would charge at each other, shoot and hope that the basic strategy that was planned at the beginning would hold out. Much less strategy was used and involved in a battle such as this. The only problem with this style of warfare for the Americans was that in certain battles the British sometimes outnumbered them four to one. One such battle that proved that the Americans could not beat the British using European warfare was in the Battle of Brandywine. Washington was trying to keep the British from overtaking Philadelphia and at least give the Continental Congress time to leave Philadelphia before they were attacked. Washington with a force of 11,000 men thought he could take on General Howe. Howe divided his army and over took Washington with a flanking maneuver and forced Washington to retreat. Washington had lost about a thousand men. This battle proved to Washington how he needed a strategy that would not have them going into a man to man combat situation where numbers were the main deciding factor. He tried to overtake General Howe at Germantown in fog by sending half of his army to the backside of the town and half to the front side of the town. You read "The American Tactics of the Revolutionary War" in category "Essay examples" The army failed to move properly so Washington lost the battle of Germantown but it prevented Howe not to have another assault on Philadelphia that year. Even though Washington lost this battle it was a victory for him personally as a commander and for the army. It proved to the Americans how they could not face the British in direct man to man combat and forced them to form new methods to fight the British so that they could survive. The Americans created new strategies in order to overcome their enemies and capitalize on their weaknesses. The native people coined this new strategy called guerrilla warfare. The basis of this style of warfare is to quickly attack your enemy and run away. The Americans carefully selected their battleground and time of attack as much as possible in guerrilla warfare so that they could have every advantage possible so that they could have a chance to win. Two such instances where the time of day and choice of terrain were the complete reasons for British defeat were at Stony Point and at Paulus Hook. The battle at Stony Point took place on the night of July fifteenth and ended the morning of July sixteenth. Washington assigned Mad Anthony Wayne to this attack. Wayne had 1,350 men that were given to him for this attack. He set his men in two tight lines and marched towards the fort in and camouflaged by the night darkness. The first men to raid the fort attacked with their bayonets. The British fort soon went into chaos and surrendered very quickly. In total this battle cost the Americans 15 lives, they killed 63 British soldiers, and General Clinton was forced to surrender the fort to the Americans. Another battle that was won by time of day and terrain was in Paulus Hook, New Jersey. Harry Lee took a small squad and attacked the 200 men post. He attacked at dawn and caught the British completely off guard and shocked them. He killed or captured almost everybody at the fort. He retreated with everyone within two hours of the attack to make sure no British reinforcements arrived. There were many different guerilla warfare styles and strategies over the course of the revolutionary war. One such strategy was to have two rows of riflemen fire and then run away. The British would then try to catch them and the troops would be lead into a trap waiting for them. Two of the best, and most successful, uses of this strategy were at the Battle of Cowpens and the Battle at Guilford Court. The Battle of Cowpens physically took place on January 17 but was set up between January 2,1781 and the day of the actual battle on January 17. The battle of Cowpens was a major battle of the war against the British for conquest as much as morals. Previous to the battle General Greene had separated his army of about 1,700 into two divisions. His army would have 1,100 and General Morgan would have about 600 men. General Cornwallis thought this to be a very foolish move and sent out Banastre Trarleton, one of the most fearsome British officers with 1,100 men. Morgan knew he would lose against Trarleton at his present so he traveled to Cowpens South Carolina to wait for the onslaught that they knew was coming. On the way to Cowpens Morgan picked up enough men to almost evenly match the British man for man. He knew that Trarleton would attack frontally so he prepared a strategy that would be able to handle it. He knew and planned on the fact that his militia would retreat at first sign of charge so he laid out a strategy that would take this into account. He had his militia stand in two rows. All of the militia that were in the rows were instructed to fire twice and leave. This strategy worked better then Morgan could have ever planned. His two rows of men, totaling about 400 men knocked back and completely destroyed the first British charge and then the militia retreated. Leaving his other men to charge at the British, General Morgan completely humiliated Trarleton. Morgan had killed or captured more than three fourths of his force. Trarleton had only escaped with 140 horsemen. The same strategy was implemented at the battle at Guilford Court. British General Cornwallis wanted revenge on General Morgan for what he did to the British at Cowpens. So Cornwallis had his army of 2,500 men trail General Morgans army who chose to go north after their victory and rejoin with General Greenes army. He trailed their army for nearly two months and after losing at least 500 men trailing Morgan and Greene, he decided to go in a complete circle back to Hillsborough. There General Nathan Greene was waiting for him. He had applied their previous strategy in the battle at Cowpens to this battle. General Greene started with 2,000 men after the Battle at Cowpens and had increased his numbers up to over 4,500 men. He decided to place a good number of his militia in two forward lines and the continental part of his army in a third row. He called Colonel Washington to protect his left flank and Light Horse Harry Lee to protect his right flank. After the quick attack Greene decided to leave and not pursue a fight. He knew that the losses that they would have suffered would not have been worth the fight but during this battle they killed about 300 British troops. This battle at Guilford Court caused Cornwallis to retreat all the way back to Wilmington and then to Virginia where the demise of the British was. Another reason the Americans won certain battles over the British army was that the British did not take the American resistance with total seriousness causing them to do some stupid things do to poor judgement. One example of a battle when the British lost due to their stupidity was in the Battle at Bennington. The British were heading towards Vermont to obtain horses, food, and other supplies to aid the German mercenaries who had been without horses for a great length of time. Lieutenant Colonel Fredrich Baum was instructed not to risk heavy losses but to scare and despoil the Vermonters. Baum left his camp with about 700 men and two cannons, which was thought to be more than enough to fight any small resistance that they might face. His first defiance of his orders was when Baum encountered a force of 200 men sent by Brigadier General John Stark. After the battle he was informed that these men were part of a militia force gathering at Bennington. He decided to press towards Bennington and destroy the force, even though it went against his orders again. Baum then marched towards Bennington. On his way there Baum saw two contingents of men going towards his rear and presumed that they were Tories that were going to flank the enemy and didnt give them a second thought after seeing them. When Baum approached Bennington, Stark order his men in front to charge, at the same time the two contingents of men already behind Baum also attack him and Baum was massacred. If Baum had taken any care as to even think of the contingents traveling behind him he could have possibly beaten the Americans at Bennington. But because of his disobedience of orders and his ignorance he lost the battle. The British, with all their money, men, supplies, and power couldnt overcome what little the Americans had. The Patriots realized, from their earliest difficulties, to capitalize on the enemys weakness. The Americans devised new tactics to overcome the British in their traditional Jomini style of warfare. The Americans used all that they possibly had to beat British. What drove the Americans to create these new strategies, though, was their desire; their desire to overcome the British is what gave the colonial fighters their true advantage during the American Revolutionary War. How to cite The American Tactics of the Revolutionary War, Essay examples

The Fiery Trends Not to be Missed

The aura of freedom, the thrill of momentum, unparalleled productivity and disruptive innovation are what adorns the essence of Holacracy. By injecting the spirits of profound Holacracy practices companies can reap unimaginable profits and benefits. It is a catalyst to give air to innovation, to motivate agility, to introduce transparency and to make everybody accountable for the tasks undertaken. It is a toolkit for realizing the utmost value of potential among the employees and to bring out every little bit of talent which is inherent in some corner of an expert. Holacracy will become a revolutionary invention in the field of corporate management system. It is a clash between openness to welcome innovation and responsibility which lies in the hands of CEO. The art of Holacracy Democratic decision making and giving regard to everyones views and ideas are the key ingredients of the newly introduced and much hyped up system of Holacracy. It is a transition from traditional vertically aligned hierarchy to hierarchy redefined in the terms of circles. The higher circles rule over the lower ones and command them to meet the required tasks. It is a cosmo of nets within the nets with a neutral hierarchy within the organization. An employee in power in a particular circle is under the power in the next one. The job roles are clearly and crisply defined, regarded and sustained in this system. So why not call it, a new operating system for the technology of business! No more being traditional Holacracy has possibilities and potentials for implementing Agile practices within the organization for an excessive value based intense line of action. Holacracy is a relief from traditional centralized, conventional, structured, governed and rules organizational structure by providing an open, friendly, accountable, innovative work system. The team based projects and proposals guided by the team leader and ruled by the top management was put to an end with Holacracy which distributes the power into the hands of teams which are mentored by the leads who may also function as a subordinate in other circles. The roots of Holacracy lies deeply intrigued into the Greek word holon which signifies a whole which is part of another bigger whole. This concept widely exemplifies the structure of circles, distributing power among all. The structure speaks The organizational structure is the driving force to lead the company to the zeniths of horizon. The structure of the company initiates the thinking ideologies and ideas towards strategies to be defined for marketing and production. As suggested by Yves Morieux, that strategies are preceded by structure, is not always the picture. Some companies also illustrates that innovative structures with more decentralized control and more distribution of power into the hands of employees affect the quality, quantity and the essence of strategies formulated. The strategies which translates them into procedures can sometimes be borne out of processes and practices which are core components of the structure of the organization. We can integrate the concept of Holacracy to the views of Yves Morieux by supporting the argument created that, Holacracy in the structure of the organization highly manipulates and rules the trend behind the strategies formulated by the organization. Its policies and openness are the driving forces to call for innovative strategies and creative procedures. However, other half of the times strategies are mapped into the structure and the culture of the organization which practices agile techniques are able to create world class structures which can guarantee success. Zappie Zappos Zappos, the shoe retailer company entered into the domain of Holacracy by understanding the limitations of conventional structure and to let the company grow and prosper without the commanding voice of CEO and other top management officers. The company realized the demise of innovative ideas under the chocking tentacles of centralization. They called for encouraging experimentation with the strategies to open the doors for innovation and invention. The operational circles are self organized and self maintained which trigger the growth of creativity in practices. The roles in Zappos are clearly defined and every employee functions as per the regarded role. A committee is managing the nerves of the organization by opening the prospective of decision making to everybody in the circles. The new lens is able to look at eventful new arenas of development by dissolving the boundaries of decision making. Grain of innovation Innovation should be in the DNA of todays competent world in order to gain competitive advantage and an edge over other competitors. Agile development practices and the organizational structure influenced by agile principles are fuels for innovative developments. And innovative principles further lead to a culture and structure which provides everybody with a space to enhance the authority framework and expectation scenario of the organization. Holacracy: Into the field David Allen Company aiming to Getting Things Done adopted the culture of Holacracy and restructured he organization to include smooth and efficient functioning which acknowledged talent and innovation. Work was done under the meta structure providing a stable rhythm to the organizational framework. It was not a complete miracle for the company but surely a magic to translate the unproductive ways into potential strategies at circle and individual level. The final call Holacracy is a rich system and an altogether new paradigm to redefine concepts and clauses of organizational structure and the way in which strategies govern them or they govern the innovation imbibed in the strategies. It is one of the hottest management trend and a structure which can well suit the organization which rewards and regards innovation and creativity. It is a bold step taken by CEOs to let the company prosper and grow at their own nourishment by providing doses of creativity and self decisions. It makes the company well adjusted in the dynamic and change triggering environment of the industry. So, organizations must gear up their bags and baggage to move in the direction of holacratic culture and structure in order to make the organization a hub for creativity and a trademark of innovation.