Evolution Units:

Evolution Trials


Christine Lee

Lawyer's Brief- Prosecution Side: Anti-Evolutionist

Opening Statement:

Questions for the Defense

Strategies:

Closing Statement:

Brag Sheet:

Wilbert Kuang

Evolution: Phillip Johnson

Reference:

Vince Lozada

Colin Paterson

Janet Siharath

Fanny Guo

Lawyer's Brief: Defense Side

Opening statement:

Strategies:

Questions for defense:

Question for prosecution:

Closing Statement:

Brag sheet: *

Maria Uriarte Biology

Charles R. Darwin's History

Shanae Williams

Pro- Evolution: Jean Baptiste Lamarck

Benny Lau

Gregor Mendel Evolution

Arleen Garcia

Lawyer's Brief: Defense

Opening Statement

Questions For Defense

Questions for Prosecution

Objections

Closing Statement

Hilt,Chotsani

Gregor Mendel (1823-1884)

Leonard D'Agostino

Jean Baptiste Lamarck

Zaneta Balantac

Lawyer's Brief: Prosecution Side: Anti-Evolutionist

Opening Statement:	

Strategies for Trial:

Objections most likely can be used:

Questions for the Prosecution and their order:

Possible Ouestions For Defense (Cross Exaamination):

Closing Statement:

Brag Sheet:

Jackie Torres

Colin Patterson

Felicia Ross

Michael Denton

Shawn Smith *

Prosecution Brief *

OPENNING STATEMENT *

Statement Questions for Prosecution Witnesses *

Other question for other lawyers *

Janet Nguyen *

Statement from Michael Denton *

Helen Lam *

Michael J. Behe - Theory of Evolution *

Bibliogaphy *

Vanessa Tulier *

Lawyer's Brief: Prosecution *

Order of witnesses.. *

Amy Yu *

Michael Behe *

References *

Sam Pon *

Evolution: Philip E. Johnson *

Camille Fisher *

Phillip E. Johnson *

Tiffany *

Evolution — Philip E. Johnson *

James Aganon *

Lawyer's Brief: Defense *

Order of Witness to Testify in the Podium: *

Strategy Questions for Defense: *

Strategy Questions for Prosecution? *

Closing Statement *

Brag Sheet *

Ng, Alice *

Charles Darwin *

References *

Guillermo Flamenco *

Jean Baptiste Lamarck *

Wesley, Faheem *

Lawyer's Brief: Defense *

Order of Witness to Testify in the Podium: *

Strategy *

Closing Statement: *

Brag Sheet *

Gin Louie *

Evolution From Charles Darwin’s Idea *

Reference: *

Marco Williams *

Kenneth R. Miller *

The Synthetic Theory *

Sarah Herbert *

Jean Baptiste Lamark *

Guillermo Flamenco *

Jean Baptiste Lamarck *

Fontanilla, Michael Ryan *

Lawyer's Brief For The Prosecution *

Opening Statement *

Ouestions for Prosecution *

Questions for Defense *

Closing Statement *

Damion Hatfield *

Arthur Holmes: Evolution Theory's *

Nimpha Torres *

Philip E. Johnson *

Eva Chan *

Michael Denton *

References For Michael Denton *

Alvaro Covarrubias *

Lawyer’s Brief: Defense *

Tina Bui *

Charles Robert Darwin *

References: *

Aaron Lagasca *

Evolution (Kenneth R. Miller) *

CHARLES DARWIN *

Sean VanSteen *

Gregor Mendel *

Katie Tong *

Lawyer's Brief: Prosecution side: Anti-Evolution *

Opening Statement: *

Questions for the Prosecution *

Questions for the Defense *

Objections: *

Closing Statement: *

Mimi Yuen *

Phillip E. Johnson *

REFERENCES *

Tony Tan *

Michael J. Behe *

Marcel Copeland *

Henry M. Morris *

Nancy Banh *

Nancy's Brief: Defense side: Pro-Evolutionist *

Opening Statement: *

Strategies for trial: For prosecution: *

Strategies for trial: For defense *

Questions for Prosecution: *

Questions for Defense: *

Closing Statement: *

BRAG SHEET! *

Tina Bui *

Charles Robert Darwin *

Ana Perez *

Gregor Mendel *

Sophia Su *

Sophia's Brief Prosecution Side: Anti-Evolutionist *

Opening Statement: *

Strategies for trial: *

Questions for Prosecution: *

Questions for Defense: *

Closing Statement: *

Brag Sheet: *

Roshanna Newt *

Michael J. Behe *

Tristan Joseph *

Michael Denton *

Stevon Cook *

Philip E. Johnson: *

Danny Yu *

LAWYER'S BRIEF: Defense *

Opening Statement: *

Strategies for trial: *

Questions for Defense: *

Questions for Prosecution: *

Closing Statement: *

Brag Sheet: *

Patrick Banks *

Donald C. Johanson *

Ashlyn Williams *

Gregor Mendel *

Ileana Merino *

Charles Darwin Theory on Evolution *

Gladys Vilchez *

Lawyer's Brief: Prosecution – Trial Outline *

Opening statement: *

Questions for Prosecution *

Cross Examination *

Conclusion: *

Strategies For Trial *

Brag Sheet *

Sam X Liu *

Michael Denton *

Jaurel Julao *

Phillip E. Johnson: Professor from UC Berkeley *

Tak Wong *

Lawyer's Brief: Defense: Pro-Evolutionist *

Opening Statement: *

Strategies for trial: *

Questions for the defense: *

Questions for prosecution: *

Evidences: *

Possible Objections: *

Closing Statement: *

Brag Sheet: *

Kenny Khounpangna *

Charles Darwin *

Kyaira Johnson *

Lawyer's Brief: Prosecution *

Opening Statement: *

Strategies for trial: *

Question for Defense: *

Question for Prosecution: *

Closing Statement: *

Wendy Lee *

Anti-Evolution: Michael J. Behe *

Bibliography: *

Wilbur Doty *

Dr. Colin Patterson *

Nick Horn *

Philip E. Johnson *

Sophia Chew *

Kenneth R. Miller *

Samuel Martinez *

Biography on Charles Darwin *

Christopher Fernandez *

Lawyer's Brief: Defense *

Opening Statement: *

Strategies for Trial: *

Questions for Prosecution: *

Questions for Defense: *

Conclusion Statement: *

Brag Sheet: *

Sophia Chew *

Kenneth R. Miller *

Samuel Martinez *

Biography on Charles Darwin *

Jasmine Yuan *

Lawyer's Brief (Prosecution side: Anti-evolutionist) *

Opening Statement: *

Strategies for trial: *

Questions for prosecution: *

Questions for defense: *

Closing Statement: *

Brag Sheet: *

Emily Wong *

Henry M. Morris *

Bibliography *

Kenny Li *

Philip E Johnson *

Reference: *

Sa, Kenny *

Lawyer's Brief: Defense Side: Evolutionist *

Opening Statement: *

Strategies for trial: *

Questions for Defense: *

Questions for Prosecution: *

Objections: *

List of Evidence Collected *

Using Evidence for Trials *

Closing Statement: *

Brag Sheet: *

Steven Sanouvong *

Charles Darwin *

Bibliography: Charles Darwin *

Willy Chen *

Donald Johanson on In Search for Our Origins *

Sources: *

Marquez. A. Harris *

A.K.A. Kenneth R. Miller *

 


Agenda Spring 2001

Agenda Home

Home

Evolution Trials 2001

click here for a printable version

 

Christine Lee

Lawyer's Brief- Prosecution Side: Anti-Evolutionist

Opening Statement:

In the dictionary, the definition of science is a systematic knowledge of the physical material world gained through observation and experimental materials. The definition of evolution is the slow, continuous process of change in the characteristics of organisms from one generation to the next. Scientists say that it takes thousands and millions of years for an organism to evolve. How can scientists put these two definitions together and still say that evolution exists. A fact has to be observed and has to be proven a number of times. Evolution is still missing so many gaps and takes so much time to see and observe that it is impossible to prove. Before, there was a skeleton of a caveman that was very interesting. Particularly the jawbone, it was just like a pig's. Now is it proven that the jawbones really were a false bone and it was from a pig. If we never had found that out, would they have linked humans to pigs? Just like the way they link humans to apes and all the other animals. Where is the missing link between ape and man? The pictures in textbooks are merely computerized drawings of what man THINKS the missing link may look. What is believable? Science is able to recreate such things like reproducing bacteria and molds, experiment and find cures, explode atoms and make weather models as cyclones and rain cycles. Then why can't science recreate the first man? For centuries, most scientists believed the universe was eternal that there was never a time when matter didn't exist, so there was no need for a God to create it. But the Big Bang changed that. The new theory says that there was a definite beginning. If the universe had a beginning, then it is logic to ask, what or WHO set it going in the first place. But with everything there is a set back. Astronomers used the Big Bang to try to explain the origin of stars and galaxies and everything in the universe by natural causes.

Questions for the Defense

Charles Darwin (Maria Uriarte):

    1. Please state your name?
    2. When you were young, how were your study skills?
    3. What were your beliefs before you became an evolutionist?
    4. In your opinion, is it possible to observe evolution?
    5. So how long does it take to observe a species until it evolves?
    6. What are some of the organisms that can prove evolution true?
    7. Is it logical to piece a puzzle of 500 with only about half the number of pieces present?
    8. Then why do you believe in evolution?
    9. If evolution is true, then why hadn't we seen anything new pop up yet?
    10. Would you consider a variety of dogs in the same family evolution? Why or why not?
    11. You wrote a book back in 1859 called "the origin of species" which opposedly solves the problem. Correct?
    12. But recently, a Harvard biologist named Ernst Mayr, one of the top evolutionists observed, says that you never really did discuss the origin of species in your book.
    13. Not only could you cite a single example of a new species originating in that book, but also neither has anyone else. What is your response to that?
    14. Before your voyage to the islands, you had many hopes in your future, but all failed, until your chance to go to the islands right?
    15. Did your father agree for you to go at first?
    16. On your voyage to the islands, how long did you stay on those islands?
    17. But within a 5-week period; such a short time, you showed him wrong and came home with a great observation and were considered to have succeeded correct?
    18. Did you ever find out what was the cause to evolution was and how it happens?

Gregor Mendel (Benny Lau):

    1. State your name please?
    2. Where did you research about evolution?
    3. How did you research?
    4. What were some works that you created about evolution?
    5. What plant was it that you chose to experiment on?
    6. Why did you choose that plant?
    7. How did you come upon this plant?
    8. Did you choose this plant in order to prove evolution?
    9. In your research, you talked about self-pollination.

Jean Baptiste Lamark (Shanae Williams):

    1. What is your name?
    2. Why do you believe in evolution?
    3. What are the four main points that you talk?
    4. Do you consider random mutation as evolution?
    5. From natural selection, how does natural selection relate to evolution?
    6. How do species replace each other?
    7. Over how much time does it take for a species to replace another?
    8. How do species evolve from one generation to the next?

Philip E. Johanson (Wilbert Kuang):

    1. What is your name?
    2. What is your profession?
    3. Do you believe in evolution? Why do you feel that way?
    4. What do you know about "Darwin's Black box"?
    5. What do you think about the theory of evolution?
    6. When you look at evidence about evolution, what do you look at and why?
    7. What part of evolution do you research about?

Colin Patterson (Vince Lozada):

    1. Verify your name please?
    2. What college did you graduate from?
    3. What is your profession?
    4. How did you get interested into being a paleontologist?
    5. What is a Paleontologist?
    6. What is your opinion about evolution?
    7. What is your opinion about evolution?

Michael Denton (Janet Siharath):

    1. State your name please?
    2. What is your opinion about Darwinian? Why? 3. How is the empirical test related to the theory?
    3. Some evolutionists say that God may have lit the fuse on the primal explosion, but then natural law take over after that. so which laws are they talking about?
    4. Are there natural processes that can build a cosmos out of gas cloud that can later on create order from random atoms to later make us?
    5. We look at the process at work today, we see the exact opposite: process of DISORDER and DISOLUTION. When we turn our telescopes on the skies, we see stars ad galaxies constantly losing mass and using up energy. Sometimes that stars even blow themselves up. How can scientists say that matter collected together and was made billions of year ago, when what wen see now is the exact opposite?
    6. How can the seasons: fall, winter, spring, and summer continue over millions and millions of year. How can they be just randomly created and continue even till now?
    7. There must be some order and design by a supreme being for life to continue and exist! Something must come from something, not nothing. Chicken Little was not totally wrong: the sky IS falling apart. Where did matter come from in order to have life to begin?
    8. The complexity from each atom and molecule doing their own job in order to live, to the body structures of how out blood flow in one direction in one vein, why not have blood evolve and turn around and flow the other day one day?
    9. This is because all this is watched over and maintained by one Supreme being. Our God.

Strategies:

    1. make the jury doubt the other witness's facts and statement.
    2. be ready with all the questions and answers that you know the witnesses can
    3. answer.
    4. be confident.
    5. Do not ask questions that will get the witness stumped.
    6. Make the questions simple and strong.
    7. Give a fact, then give strong evidence to back it up.

Closing Statement:

Some evolutionists say that God may have lit the fuse on the primal explosion, but then natural laws take over after that. So which laws are they talking about? Are there natural processes that can build a cosmos out of a gas cloud that can later on create order from random atoms to later make us? We look at the processes at work today, we see the exact opposite: process of DISORDER and DISSOLUTION. When we turn our telescopes on the skies, we see stars and galaxies constantly losing mass and using up energy. Sometimes the stars even blow themselves up. How can scientists say that matter collected together and was made billions of years ago, when what we see now is the exact opposite? How can the seasons: fall, winter, spring, and summer continue-over millions and millions of years. How can the planets revolving around the sun, the cycles of birth, life and death, the water cycle, how our eyes see, our circulation system, day and night, continue even as we speak? How can they be just randomly created and continue even till now? There must be some order anal design by a supreme being for life to continue and exist! Something must come from something, not nothing. Chicken Little was not totally wrong: the sky JS falling apart. Where did matter come from in order to have life to begin? The complexity from each atom and molecule doing their own job in order to live, to the body structures of how our blood flows in one erection in one vein, why not have the blood evolve and turn around and flow the other way one day? This is because all this is watched over and maintained by one Supreme Being. Our God.

Brag Sheet:

For this trial, I was the prosecution lawyer. I help Wilbert, Vince with their packets. I help Nancy Banh with her opening and closing statements in her brief. I researched many pages to get a good foundation about evolution and hopefully can use it in the trial. During the few days that we worked in class, I used my time wisely, balancing out my time with the witnesses and my time to get a good foundation about evolution. I stayed up quite late to give the witnesses a chance for a last minute statement to turn in to me and Mr. Hartzog. I emailed to Mr. Hartzog, hoping he can give me advice and hoping he can help me rush my witnesses when they were lagging. I tried very hard and stressed a lot on this evolution unit because my beliefs were not totally going for evolution. Even though I had a hard time learning this unit, I found it very interesting that I got to be a lawyer to fight against evolution. That way I can relate this to my religion and later I found it easier to work.

Wilbert Kuang

Evolution: Phillip Johnson

My name is Philip Johnson. I was born in Cleveland, Ohio in 1906. I. am a law clerk for the Supreme Court and a law teacher at the University of Berkeley. I do not believe in the evolution theory.

I am Berkeley and author of the book Darwin on Trial and Reason in the Balance. From the books that I read about Darwin's theory there was not enough evidence to say that there was a gradual change in evolution of the animals. New things appeared in the rocks dated in different ages but-there is no pattern of gradual change. A matter of fact, there's no ability to identify specific ancestors of major groups. I think that the theory of evolution there's a flaw because a question still remains that is, also there's a missing link in the stage of evolution, from ape to human. How can fishes mutate into mammals or apes mutate to humans?

Once you admit Darwinian evolution, God becomes a fiction, and everything else flows from that naturalistic evolution is the creator and God had nothing to do with it. There is no evidence that states that a bacteria or a cell had, .evolved or mutated and created living creatures. How can nature create things by itself, it needs something to start it off and that's what god did. You can't explain the origin of anything (like vision) unless you can explain the origin of the mechanisms that make it work. The centerpiece of Life Through Time is the Hard Facts Wall. There was also the Cambrian explosion; it showed that there is no connection between the fossils. The Cambrian explosion says that the fossils are connected to a fossil not their own. There is also no evidence that states that the fossil pattern of common ancestors and intermediates connecting them together.

Philip E. Johnson believed in god, and there for he believed that god had created the world. He should have done experiments instead of reading about books and say how evolution(the gradual change of species) does not connect. If he had done experiments he would have known the key to the gradual change process or mutation process.

Philip E. Johnson questions the theory of evolution. His perspective of evolution is based on God creating a more advanced species to take over the weaker primates. But I believe the weakness in his work is that even if there is a God, and it was his idea of creating a more intelligent species to conquer the weaker species. Then there must have been a vicious battle of strength. This battle demonstrates "survival of the fittest". The strong species survives after eliminating the weak. God doesn't just say he doesn't want a species one day and snap his fingers and the weaker species just disintegrate in a cloud of smoke.

Reference:

http://www.ori,gins.org/menus/piohnson.html

http://www.12bs.ora/wgbh/nova/odyaLey/debate/

http://www.arn.org docs/orpages/or161/16lmain.htm

Vince Lozada

Colin Paterson

I, Colin Patterson, who worked at the British Museum of Natural History in London, was one of the leaders of the philosophy of biological systematic known as "transformed cladistics." On November 5, 1981, I gave a now infamous talk at the American Museum of Natural History in New York, to the Systematic Discussion Group, which met monthly at the museum. Well anyways I was born 1933.

"Can you tell me anything about evolution?" is a question I ask when the subject of evolution came about in an interview.

The question still matters, I argue, because evolution is still assumed to be the primary determinant of phylogenetic reasoning. But my agnosticism about evolution--expressed in 1981 as, "I had been working on this stuff for twenty years, and there was not one thing I knew about it". I describe that agnosticism by looking at patterns in molecular data. I thought he had found answers to my own question: In 1981, I knew of no sensible answer to the question, but in the ensuing decade I came to believe that there were two things I knew about evolution. First, that transitions [purines, adenine (A) and guanine (G), mutating to purines, e.g., A à G; or pyrimidines, cytosine (C) and thymine (T), mutating to pyrimidines, e.g., T à C] are more frequently fixed than Tran versions [where a purine mutates to a pyrimidine, or vice versa] and second, that at the level of DNA, the great majority of substitutions take place despite natural selection rather than because of it.

However, I came to doubt whether in seeing these patterns I was grasping the process of evolution; do transition bias and neutral substitution represent knowledge about evolution, or something else? Further, and more generally, why should I, a morphologist, claim to know something about molecular evolution but nothing of morphological evolution? We must distinguish between patterns to be explained and the process theories by which we explain those patterns--a distinction foundational to the "transformed cladistic" perspective on systematic and phylogeny. The molecular patterns I observed are thus only data awaiting explanation." I therefore believe I was mistaken in thinking that I knew something about molecular evolution," I wrote. "Instead, I know (or have learned) something about the properties of molecular data, and those properties are amongst the things that must be explained by evolutionary theory."

...I mentioned a question ('Can you tell me anything you know about evolution?') that I have put to various biologists, and an answer that had been given: I know that evolution generates hierarchy.' In the framework of phylogenetic reconstruction and our current problems with it, another answer comes to mind: I know that evolution generates homoplasy' [or "convergence," in the older jargon of systematic]. In both cases, the answer is not quite accurate. It would be truer to say, I yknow that evolution explains hierarchy' or'I know that evolution explains homoplasy.' We must remember the distinction between the cart--the explanation--and the horse--the data. And where models are introduced in phylogenetic reconstruction, we should prefer models dictated by features of the data to models derived from explanatory theories. Even though I died on March 9 1998 my memory will live on and legacy. I died when I was 55 years of age. I died of a sudden death which is still a mystery. May my soul live forever.

Janet Siharath

No Report

Fanny Guo

Lawyer's Brief: Defense Side

Opening statement:

Even though there are no solid evidence that can prove evolution is a 100% true yet, but there are many evidences to back up the theory of evolution. The evolution theory explained many questions that we had and why we are here today. Without evolution, then how would we explain how did we get here and the extinction of many animals. The history of human is still very sort, and it's a miracle of what we've already found that could be the evidences to prove evolution. Things and questions that couldn't be answer in past were discovered by many scientists today. Compare now and the past, it's a fact that we have found more evidences to prove evolution now. But there are only a few of evidence to disapprove evolution. So I believe that in the future, we will be able to find the other missing pieces of the puzzle to complete the whole theory of evolution and to explain those negative evidences.

Strategies:

    1. Listen carefully of the questions the prosecute lawyer ask for my witnesses and the prosecute side's witnesses.
    2. Show the jury that my witnesses are professional and are prepare.
    3. Ask more questions for the prosecute side's witnesses' weak points.
    4. Have my witnesses prepare and also myself well prepare.
    5. Ask the prosecute side's witnesses questions that still have doubt about the evolution.

Trial:

-First piece of evidence- the geological time line poster.

Questions for defense:

Charles Darwin (Maria Uriarte):

    1. What's your name?
    2. How were your school days as a teenager?
    3. What degrees have you earned?
    4. How old were you when you started your voyage on the H.M.S Beagle?
    5. How long was your trip on the Beagle?
    6. From your expedition, which part would you say was you favorite?
    7. What is your theory of evolution, please explain.
    8. In Darwinian, did you have anything related or affected by your religion?
    9. What makes you believe in evolution so strongly?
    10. What can you say about the 13 different species of finches found on the Galapagos. -Second piece of evidence. The finch chart that recorded the 13 finches Darwin found on the island.
    11. What other animals did you find on the Galapagos.
    12. What did you find out about those animals?
    13. What is Natural Selection?
    14. How does Natural Selection related to evolution?
    15. Do you believe in extinction?
    16. Why were there extinction and how do new species replace the extinction?

Gregor Mendel (Benny Lau):

    1. What is your name?
    2. Do you believe in evolution? Why?
    3. How do define evolution?
    4. What are your thoughts about evolution?
    5. What have you studied that prove evolution is right?
    1. How do you put your studies in evolution?
    2. How do you put genetics in evolution?
    3. What does evolution take in you life?
    4. Do you believe in evolution?
    5. How do you put extinction into evolution?
    6. What do you think about animals today compared to earlier animals.

Jean le Baptiste Larmarck (Shanae Williams):

    1. What's your name?
    2. What is Lamarckism?
    3. What are the main points of the Lamarckism?
    4. What helped you create this theory?
    5. Do you believe in evolution? Why?
    6. What do you think about animals?
    7. What are some of the places you have done your research?
    8. What do you think about animals?
    9. What do you think about evolution and evolving?
    10. What things have you studied to prove evolution?
    1. What made you interested in studying evolution?
    2. Is there anything from your study of Botany that could prove evolution? What?
    3. Do you think there are extinction?
    4. What happen after the species extinct?
    1. another point of Lamarckism-species have evolved from ancestral forms that are
    2. extinct. The relationship and similarities between human and Lucy are showed
    3. clearly.

Question for prosecution:

Philip E. Johnson (Wilbert Kuang):

    1. What's your name?
    2. What do you think about the theory of evolution?
    3. Do you think Darwinian had anything related to God? If yes, please explain.
    4. So do you believe in evolution? If no, why?
    5. do you agree that the extinction of species was replaced by some stronger species? If no, please explain.

Michael Denton (Janet Siharath):

    1. Do you think Darwinian is correct? If no, why?
    2. Do you think there's a pattern for how species evolve? If no, why?
    3. How would you explain the similarities of some species that lived close to each other?
    4. Is the reason why you disagree with Darwinian was because you think he put God in his theory of evolution?
    5. Since you say humans are directly created or no pattern, how would you explain the relationship between Lucy, chimp, and human today?
    6. Do you consider the records found by many scientists like Darwin's finches, Mendel's study about the genetics, and Lamarck's giraffes' records as evidences to back up the evolution? If not, what would you consider them?
    7. Is an empirical test so important for a evolution theory, that it's impossible to make or prove a theory true without an empirical test if there are lots of evidence to back it up? If yes, why?
    8. Why do you think there are always more positive examples than negative ones?
    9. If a theory could change a negative evidence into a positive one, then do you think this theory is a correct and good theory? If no, why?
    10. Can you think of any theory that's proved or confirmed by negative evidence?

Colin Patterson (Vince Lozada):

Closing Statement:

Over all, it's clear that there are many evidences that could prove evolution. Just by looking at the evidences provided by some of the scientists, other then evolution, what other reasons are there to explain what they've found and studied. The prove of how new species replace other old species, the relationships and similarities passed by the ancestor of other animals, and how animals evolve to fit the change of environment, are all proves for the evolution. Many question marks about evolution in the past were being solved, so it's totally possible for us in the future to find the other few missing pieces of the evolution puzzle. Just pretend there's no evolution because a few things is missing and not yet to be able to answer are not how scientists should be.

Brag sheet:

As a defense lawyer for this trial, I did lots of research for my topic to make my trial successful. I did research on different kinds fossil records, genetic mutations, geologic time scale, and other things about how are fossils destroy and made. Those research are just some preparation I had to before really started on my trial. Besides getting myself prepared, I also needed to get my witnesses prepared. I divided up jobs for them, tell them what information I need from them, keep them on track and most important, is to have them really get everything done. Then after they finished and gave me all the information, then was my job to wrap it all up.

It was not like I just have to type up everything that given by the witnesses then I'm done with my job. I had read over all of their essays, not only my own witnesses, but also the prosecutor side's witnesses' essays. After reading them, I had to decide what are the possible questions that I can ask for my witnesses that would prove evolution. But at the same time I need to think of how to cover the weak points that my witnesses have, so the prosecute lawyer wouldn't have any chance to take advantage from that. I also need to find evidences for them to back up their statements to make it reliable. It's my job to show the jury that my witnesses are professional and the reasons why they believe in evolution so strongly. I had made copies for each of my witnesses the questions that I might ask them to get them prepared for this trial. Then the next thing I had to do is make questions for the prosecutor's witnesses. I had to read their essays and see if there are any weak point they have so I can take advantage of. Because their weak points are something that I can use to prove evolution and how they are incorrect. Most but not least, I had to write up the whole brief and gets very well prepare for the trial.

Maria Uriarte Biology

Charles R. Darwin's History

Many scientists have researched evolution. Some of these people do not believe that evolution is possible while others are trying to prove the process of evolution. One of the persons that tried to prove the process of evolution was Charles Robert Darwin; he dedicated his life to trying to find a logical explanation for evolution.

Darwin was born on February 12, 1809 and died on April 19, 1882. When he was young, he did not really care about his studies. His dad tried to get him to go to school and get a medical degree, but Darwin would constantly skip class to learn about plants and animals. Darwin's father's dream was for both his sons to become physicians. Darwin's older brother started up the career and later on left it. This made it harder on him to tell his father that he was not interested in taking up medicine. When his father found out through Darwin's sisters that he was no longer interested in medicine, he decided that his son should become a clergyman. He was sent to Christ's College, Cambridge to get his degree, but he never did earn it. Later, at the age of 21 Darwin passes his examination for the BA in Theology, Euclid. In 1877, he was awarded an Honorary Doctorate in Laws and an MD. Then when he was around 16, he was offered a position on the ship H.M.S Beagle which would sail to the Galapagos island and research animals and species there. Darwin was fascinated during his trip, and was determined to prove evolution, which was something he very strongly believed in.

In 1831, Darwin boarded a ship named the H.M.S Beagle, which would inspire him to a life of research and study. During the trip, Darwin only visited four islands, San Cristobal, Floreana, Isabela, and Santiago. The voyage would last five years, but he would only spend five weeks on these islands. The most known island visited by Darwin is the Galapagos. However, birds were not the only thing that Darwin studied, he also researched tortoises, iguanas and a vast variety of animals. About the tortoises, there is a theory that a superior tortoise is determined by the ability to lift its neck higher than a rival is. When Darwin started to study lizards, he believed that there were 4-5 different species of these on the islands. Two types of iguanas are the Leiocephalus and the Amblyrhyncus, one of which is terrestrial and the other aquatic. While Darwin was on the island, he also made some studies on 13 different types of finches that he found there. Some of the differences identified were their bill, their niches and their habitats. Darwin's conclusion is that species of birds, not individual birds, become timid, only after a long exposure to humans. A complete evolutionary explanation might suppose that the less timid birds, being more likely to be by humans, would leave fewer descendents, while those naturally timid, being less likely to be killed would leave more offspring. Overall, he found variety of species from island to island and variety from ecological niches. He later theorized that finches and other species like iguanas, showed the phenomenon of how populations adapted to different ecological niches.

When he returned from the voyage he was almost totally convinced about evolution. He did some research on other scientists that had also researched evolution, one of them being Jean Baptiste Lamarck, and then devised his own theory. The theory that he devised is known as Natural Selection. The way that Natural Selection works is that individuals born with certain characteristics will enjoy an advantage over their peers, and if they pass it onto their offspring, they too will be able to enjoy the same advantages.

As the environment changes, individuals that can better adapt to these new environments will do better, live longer and produce more offspring. Then eventually, the population will grow to look different from its original version. If there are enough changes, as so to satisfy a taxonomist, it can be classified as a new species. Stating that new species arise when changes in the environment favor the new characteristics over the old ones.

There are four parts to the theory of evolution. The first one is that every species has variation within the genes. The second part states that within an environment that are animals better suited for survival and therefore leave more offspring. The third part says that since species change overtime, the new species is more successful over the old one and therefore the old species become extinct. The fourth and final part indicates that there is a lot of evidence from species that are now on earth that relates them to fossils; this shows the evolution from ancestral forms to current forms of species.

When Darwin devised the theory of Natilral Selection, he did it to explain differences between species. He found plenty of information to prove this. The one thing he could not figure out was what the mechanism, which passed on traits from one animal to the other, was. He was never able to answer the question of what causes evolution and how it happens.

In conclusion, I would say that although Darwin was not able to answer a question that to this day has not been answered, he led us to many clues in evolution. His theories, studies, and ideas helped many modern day scientists answer questions to the past and to parts of the process of evolution. Without a lot of the work that Darwin did in his days, it would take scientists a much longer time to be able to solve a never ending puzzle, the puzzle of evolution.

Shanae Williams

Pro- Evolution: Jean Baptiste Lamarck

My name is Jean Baptiste Pierre Antoine de Monet, Chevalier de Lamarck. I am a French Naturalist. I was born on August 1,1744 at Bazentin-le-petit,Picardy. As the youngest of 11 children , I was expected to have a career in church because that's what my father wanted. When my father died, I joined the French amy in the foot steps of some of my older brothers. I left because of injuries. When I was off from the injuries I had time to study natural science. I then become interested in plants and I spent a lot of time studying Botany in Paris. I went to the University of Paris. I later in my career came up with my very own theory the Lamarckism.

The six main points in my theory of evolution, but there are only four main points in what you all know as evolution. The points are summarized like this 1. Within every species there are different genes that cause random mutation. 2. The stronger will survive and the weak will not known as Natural Selection. 3. Over time species change and replace each other 4. Species have evolved from Ancestral forms that are extinct(evolution) My theory has taken years to come up with, it's not just my theory but many other scientist like me.

My theory known as the Lamarckism is divided into two laws and six main points.

    1. organisms are a result of nature that happens through time.
    2. Simplest bodies are formed first.
    3. Organisms surrounding cause the development of new organs.
    4. 4.Growth in organism.
    5. 5.Change of conditions allows the organism to develop over time.
    6. All organisms have gone through changes and are still going through it. These six points explain my theory.

Benny Lau

Gregor Mendel Evolution

I, Gregor Mendel is a very important person of science. I haven't a say about the evolution theory but my research provides many evidence and back up for the evolution theory. If I were alive today I would most likely believe in the evolution theory and is studying more ways of proving it.

I, Gregor Johann Mendel was born in Heinzendorf, Austria on July 22, 1822. I died in Brno, Austria January 6, 1884. I was born to peasant parents in a small agrarian town in Czechoslovakia. Anton and Rosine Mendel are Gregor Mendel's parents. I started out my early lifetime farming and gardening with my parents. I'm a student of biology. During my lifetime I have studied theology in the Augustinian Monostary. After three years after I failed a teacher's examination I went of to study science and mathematics in the University of Vienna. After my studies there I joined a local science research society. During my studies I also became a member of the Zoologist-botanisher Vernin in Vienna.

The definition of the theory of evolution is the change in the genetic make up of a population or species over time. The theory of evolution can be broken into four parts. The first part is the variation in the genes of every species. The second is that in a particular environment some species are more suited for survival so they can leave more offspring. This is called the natural selection. The third is over time evolution in species will replace the old species causing the old species to extinction. The fourth is that the clear differences in the fossils discovered compared to the modern animals today is caused by the evolution of animals.

In the theory of evolution genetics is a big part of supporting the evolution theory and that's what I, Gregor Mendel have studied most of my lifetime. I studied the patterns I found in the basis of genetics (heredity). This showed me that traits are determined by the instructions encoded in the DNA of the chromosomes an individual receives from each parent (genes). Scientists today using the information of my studies can have a better comparison of the "evolved animals today" and the animals of the earlier times.

I used pea plants in his study of genetics. Mathematics was a big part of my studies. I put mathematics in my studies and counted the offspring of pea plants. I chose to study the pea plant on a count of several reasons. One of the reasons was the easy extinction of the difference of the many forms of pea plants. He began this experiment by allowing each variety of plants self-pollinate for a period of time. Then he cross-pollinated the two different varieties of plants. I called this the F 1 generation. My final step in this experiment is to let the fl generation of plants to self-pollinate. From there I can count the offspring of the plants and get the information he needed. I counted 705 plants with purple flowers and 224 plants with white flowers, from that he obtained the 3 to 1 ratio in the plants. Then I found that only the plants with recessive traits were true breeding and that only one third of the plants with dominate traits were true breeding, from that I found that the 3 to 1 ratio was really a disguise for the 1 to 2 to 3 ratio.

The results of that experiment soon became my theory of heredity. It composes of 5 key elements. First is that parents does not pass down traits directly to its offspring instead only portions of the information that operate in the offspring produces the trait. Second each trait of the offspring is a combination of two traits of the offspring's parents. Third the physical appearance (phenotype) of an individual is determined by the alleles that code for the traits. Fourth a the offspring receives one allele from each of it's parents. Fifth the presence of the allele does not necessary mean that that particular trait will show as a phenotype. By using the theory of my studies novw~you can use punnet squares to calculate the probabilities of the phenotypes of the offspring.

The strength of my studies is that it's so accurate in predicting the phenotypes of each parent's offspring. The weakness of my studies is that he didn't get a chance of realizing his work into proving or refuting evolution. But most likely my research in the evolution will result in the proving of the theory. My studies is a big part in the evolution theory today.

My studies on genetics is a big part of helping proving the evolution theory and shouldn't be left out while trying to prove or refute the evolution theory. Looking at the physical characteristics of modern animals and animals in the past shouldn't be the only way of interpreting the theory of evolution. Going further into the animal's genetics and traits would help revealing the truth of the evolution theory in a more bold and precise way.

Arleen Garcia

Lawyer's Brief: Defense

Opening Statement

Hello. My name is Arleen Garcia and I will be representing Jean Baptiste PierreAntoine de Monet, Gregor Mendel, and Charles Darwin, in the case of Evolution. Evolution states that the various types of animals and plants have their origin in other preexisting types and that the distinguishable differences are due to modifications in successive generations. How do we know that life has descended through millions of years from a common ancestor? We accept the inescapable conclusions drawn from the physical evidence. We accept evolution because that's what the evidence unambiguously tells us, and for no other reason. Some people experience difculty in accepting evolution. That is not due to flaws in evolution, but flaws in their understanding of biology. The most common questions about evolution illustrate that few people have done any investigating for themselves. We in our modern society have gotten used to soundbyte bits of information that we can digest without having to think much. Yes, understanding evolution and science will take some effort on your part. Is it worth it? Absolutely! Today we have come to save evolution and let it me known that it exists.

Ouestions For Defense

First Witness: Lamarck

    1. Can you please state your name?
    1. When were you born?
    2. Where did you go to school?
    3. What did you do before you entered college?
    4. Where did you do your research?
    5. While you were growing up, what did your parents want you to be?
    6. What places did you travel to?
    7. During your expeditions what information did you find?
    8. Do you believe in evolution? Why?
    1. Can you please explain your theory?
    2. Can you explain what classification is?
    3. What made you start it?
    4. Do you believe in extinction? Why?

Second Witness: Mendel

    1. Can you please state your name?
    2. What is your occupation?
    3. Do you believe in evolution? Why?
    4. What evidence do you have that supports evolution?
    5. Please state your experiments that were based on evolution
    6. What kind of laws did you make traced on the evolution?

Third Witness: Darwin

    1. Can you please state your name?
    2. What is your occupation?
    3. Do you believe in evolution?
    4. Why?
    5. What evidence do you have to support the evolution?
    6. How did you come to believe in evolution?
    7. What island did you visit?
    8. What did you find on that island?
    9. How did that affect your beliefs?

Show evidence of Defences

Questions for Prosecution

Denton

    1. What do you regard as the strongest argument against Darwinism?
    2. Please explain what that book teaches us about how to defeat Darwinism.
    3. Your conversion to Christianity came in your midthirties, until that point how did you believe we got here?
    4. You believe that God created the world? It started with the lands, then animals and then humans, correct? Tell me then, how do explain the many dinosaur bones found?
    5. Can you please explain some evidences that you found to help you disagree with Darwin's Theory of evolution?

Colin Patterson:

    1. Please state your name to the court.
    2. Do you believe in evolution?
    3. What kind of evidence do you have to support yourself that evolution is not true?

Michael Denton:

    1. Please state your name to the court.
    2. Do you believe in evolution?
    3. You made a book called Evolution a Theory in Crisis. Can you explain what you said
    4. in your book about evolution?
    5. Can you tell us any other information that you found that can show us that evolution is false?
    6. 5.Why do you think evolution is false?

Objections

** Asked and answered

•:• Assumes unestablished facts

•:• Conclusion

•: Irrevelent/Immaterial

•:• Leading

•:• Lack of of Proper Predicate

** Non-Responsive

•* Improper/Argumentive

•.• Speculative

Closing Statement

At a minimum, three things are needed for evolution to happen: Birth, death, and genetic variation. More specifically, 1) the births of many more individuals than can survive, to give the maximum genetic potential; 2) the disproportionately high percentage of deaths of organisms who are less well suited to their environments and predatory conditions, and therefore are unable to leave as many offspring; and 3) genetic variation to produce the raw material of physical change, which is then acted upon by natural selective forces. All of this has nothing to do with the species wanting to evolve into another species. Creatures do not choose to evolve. If the environment and food supply changes, or if the species relocates to a new environment, or a new species enters the area and competes, evolution will probably occur- or the species may become extinct. There are no 'end products' of evolution because evolution has not stopped. The whole idea of "end products" and a rising hierarchy of "higher" life forms are incorrect. Species adapt to current environmental pressures, and also from pressures from predators and/or competing species. With this is mind; one cannot speak about "end products", unless all such pressures reach an unchanging state. Extinct species are not necessarily "unsuccessful" just because they became superseded by a new variant. They might have been extremely successful for 99% of their duration. Were the dinosaurs an unsuccessful species? They dominated the earth for 160 million years, far longer than humans. But things change- environments, competition, available resources, etc. What was successful yesterday might be unsuccessful tomorrow. Due to all these facts, and all the evidence, how can you not believe in evolution? I ask you know, is there such thing as evolution. I will answer that question. Yes, evolution exists. You be the judge.

Hilt,Chotsani

Gregor Mendel (1823-1884)

The first person to discover the basic laws of heredity and suggest the existence of genes was an Austrian monk, named Gregor Mendel. Gregor was born in july22,1822 and died January 6,1884. The importance of his work was not realized until 1900, at which time his findings laid the foundation for the science of genetics. Gregor was born Johann Mendel in Heinzendorf, Austrian Silesia ( now Czech Republic), he changed his name to Gregor in 1843 when he entered the Augustinian monastery at Brynn(Brno). He was ordained a priest in 1847 and in 1851 was sent to the university of Vienna for training as a teacher of mathematics and natural sciences. He returned to Brynn in 1854, where he taught until 1868.

In the Evolution Theory it states that a random mutation is genes of every species. Natural selection is an particular environment, with some species, sub population species that are better suited. Change within species leads to the replacement of old species by new species. Earth had evolved or descended from ancestral forms that are now extinct.

Mendel's Treatises documented his observations on the incidence of various characteristic in cross-bred pea plants as manifested in subsequent generations. Later known as Mendel's Laws, his famous principles of hereditary transmission were to revolutionize the cultivation of plants in the twentieth century. To this day- on the threshold of the widespread introduction of genetic engineering in practical cultivation- Mendel's laws are still as valid as they ever were. Mendel's work made it possible for the first time systematically to exploit the genetic resources of plants. As a result, genetics was to become established as a scientific discipline in its own right and would develop at enormous speed, to the benefit of the whole of mankind.

Mendel's research reflected his personality. Once he crossed peas and mice of different varieties and phenomena of dominance and segregation. He saw traits were inherited in certain numerical ratios. He came then came up with the idea of dominance and segregation of genes and set out to test it in peas. It took seven years to cross and score the plants to the thousands to prove the laws of inheritance3. From his studies, Mendel derived certain basic laws of heredity: heredity factors do not combine, but are passed intact; each member of the parental generation transmits only half of its heredity factors to each offspring; and different offspring of the same parents receive different sets of heredity factors. Mendel's work became the foundation for modern genetics.

The impact of genetic theory is no longer questioned in anyone's mind. Many diseases are known to be inherited and pedigrees are typically traced to determine the probability of passing along any hereditary disease. Plants are now designed in laboratories to exhibit desired characteristics. The practical results of Mendel's research has not only changed the way we perceive the world but also the way we live in it.

Leonard D'Agostino

Pro: Evolution: Jean Baptiste Lamarck

Jean Baptiste Pierre Antoine de Monet, Chevalier de Lamarck was a French naturalist. He was born on August 1, 1744 at Bazentin-le-petit, Picardy. As the youngest of 11, Lamarck was expected to have a career in church because that's what his father wanted. When his father died he joined the French army following in the foot steps of some of his older brothers. Lamarck left the military because of an injury. During his time of being injured he fell back to studying the natural sciences. He grew interest in plants and spent lots of time studying botany in Paris. In Paris he also attended the University of Paris. Lamarck through his career has came up with his own theory of evolution called Lamarckism. He later died on December 18, 1829.

There are six mains points in Lamarcks theory of evolution, but there are only four main points in what we now know as Evolution. The points are summarized like this: I)Within every species there are different genes that cause random mutation 2)The stronger will survive and the weak will not known as Natural Selection 3)Over time species change and replace each other 4)species have evolved from ancestral forms that are extinct (evolution) This theory has taken years to come up with. It's not just Darwin's theory, but many other scientist like Lamarck. Darwin used his thoughts on evolution and combined them with others to come up with this theory. There are some similarities between Darwin's theory and Lamarckism.

The theory known as Lamarckism is divided into two laws and six main points. The main points are: 1) organisms are results of nature that happens through time 2) simplest bodies are formed first 3) organisms surrounding cause the development of new organs 4) growth in organism 5) change of conditions allows the organism to develop over time 6) all organisms have gone through changes and are still going through it. These six points explain his giraffe theory: A giraffe can grow a longer neck through stretching all the time for food and this trait can be passed in the offspring.

Zaneta Balantac

Lawyer's Brief: Prosecution Side: Anti-Evolutionist

Opening Statement:

How do you credit or discredit something? Through evidence. Over the years there have been many debates on whether the evolution theory is true or false. Has it been proven true? People say they found evidence that has proven evolution. But the truth of the matter is that the proof is not complete. You cannot prove that something is true until you have all the evidence. Ladies and gentlemen, I am here today to show you the facts that evolution is false.

Strategies for Trial:

    1. Prepare Prosecution's witnesses: hide the weakest in the middle and put the strongest last.
    2. Ask strong questions: simple and wouldn't hurt the case.
    3. Rephrase questions for witnesses.
    4. Use evidence wisely for each witness.
    5. Lead the witnesses until a certain point so it won't hurt the case.
    6. Use the objections against Defense as much as possible.
    7. Be aware of holes in your case and try to cover it up. Be aware of holes in their case and try to reveal it to the jury.
    8. Use harmful questions that will make the jury doubt the Defense's case.
    9. Brace yourself for the Defense's questions and cross-examinations.
    10. Try to look that you know what you are talking about.
    11. Pressure the Defense' witnesses through asking tough questions.
    12. Show how unprepared they are.
    13. Make eye contact with the jury to have a better connection with them.
    14. Look strong until the very end.

Objections most likely can be used:

1. Ask and answered

2. Assumes unestablised facts.

3. Conclusion

4. Relevance

5. Leading

6. Non-responsive

7. Argumentative

8. Badgering

9. Speculative

10. Multiple

Questions for the Prosecution and their order:

Colin Patterson (Jackie Torres):

    1. May you state your name to the court please?
    2. Dr. Patterson, what is your occupation?
    3. Have you ever heard of a man named Charles Darwin?
    4. Have you ever heard of his theories?
    5. Have you ever analyzed his theories?
    6. What theory are you most familiar with?
    7. And what is his theory of evolution about?
    8. How long have you been researching on his theory?
    9. Do you agree with the theory of evolution?
    10. And why is that Dr. Patterson?
    11. Can you please tell the court what researches you did that concluded your belief?
    12. (Show Evidence of Skulls and Chance) Dr. Patterson, what can you tell me about these two papers I am showing you right now?

13) No further questions your honor.

Phillip E. Johnson (Tyrone Corley):

    1. State your name and occupation to the court please.
    2. Mr. Johnson, are you by any chance familiar with the concepts of evolution?
    3. Have you ever tried to analyze it?
    4. How long have you been analyzing the theory of evolution?
    5. And what conclusion did you come to?
    6. Have you ever debated your conclusion with anyone? Who?
    7. And pray may I ask, where was that debate held?
    8. The Internet, was that debate called?
    9. How did you debate through the Internet?
    10. And how many letters were exchanged between the two of you?
    11. Who was the last letter by?
    12. (Show Letter 6 and 8) Are these two of your letters that you have written to

Kenneth R. Miller?

    1. May you please read the neon-highlighted portion in letter 8?
    2. Do you believe in that statement?
    3. Why?
    4. What evidence is there that supports your theory?
    5. And what is wrong with the fossil record?
    6. No further questions your honor.
    7. *If needed, show other evidence (A Glitch in the Evolution of Whales or Darwin Was Wrong)

Michael Denton (Felicia Ross):

    1. State your name and occupation to the court please.
    2. Well Dr. Denton, do you know what is evolution?
    3. Have you ever heard of the theory of evolution?
    4. Do you by any chance analyze the theory of evolution?
    5. And have you come to a conclusion after analyzing that theory?
    6. What is your conclusion?
    7. Have you by any chance ever written your ideas down somewhere? Where?
    8. And what is your book called sir?
    9. In your book, what ideas have you written down to say that evolution is false?
    10. So what exactly is the evidence required to prove the sequence of evolution?
    11. How may you discover if there is a sequence or not?
    12. And have there been enough proof found to show a sequence?
    13. *(Show Evidence=Skulls Timeline or Our Earliest ancestors) Could you please tell the court what this evidence show?
    14. No further questions your Honor

Possible Ouestions For Defense (Cross Exaamination):

Jean Baptiste Lamarck (Leonard D'agostino):

    1. Mr. Lamarck, what did you do after joining;the regiment?
    2. How long have you devoted yourself to your work?
    3. And were you ever interested in how our world progressed over the centuries?
    4. Have you ever pursued these interests?
    5. And what conclusion have you come up with?
    6. What are the main points in your doctrine?
    7. And have you any evidence that support/prove the main points in your doctrine?
    8. No further questions your honor.

Charles Darwin (Denisha Otis):

    1. Mr. Darwin, do you believe in the theory of evolution?
    2. And what led you to that conclusion?
    3. What did you learn through your voyage?
    4. Have you ever studied different species on your voyage,(Galapagos Islands)?
    5. What species did you study?
    6. And did you study only one species of birds?
    7. What conclusions did you come to after studying those species?
    8. May you state the four main points on your theory?
    9. In your theory of evolution, you stated that overtime leads to the replaceTent of old species by new species and less successful species become extinct. Do you by any chance have proof of this?
    10. *(If say yes, show Skulls timeline) Mr. Darwin, what does this paper show you?
    11. And do you see anything odd about what is on this paper?
    12. Mr. Darwin, in your theory it said that there is clear evidence from fossils that species have evolved constantly through time. Does this skull timeline show any gaps?

Gregor Mendel (Chotsani Hilt):

    1. Mr. Mendel, were you the first person to discover the basic laws of hereditary?
    2. And please tell us how you came to those laws.
    3. So have you come to that conclusion after studying peas?
    4. Would you please describe to the court the procedures in how you studied the peas?
    5. And what did the data show Mr. Mendel?
    6. Aside, from the physical traits you described, how does the physical traits relate to genetics?
    7. Besides peas, have you ever studied other species of organisms that led you to this same conclusion?
    8. One last question Mr. Darwin, have you ever studied the theory of evolution?
    9. No further questions.

Closing Statement:

Your honor, people of the jury, and my fellow citizens, we are here today to prove whether the theory of evolution is true or false. From what you have heard today, do you think evolution is true? Surely you must be able to recognize that there is not enough evidence to support the theory. You have heard from people, scientists even, who have dedicated a part of their lives to studying this theory; to prove it or disprove it. The defense shows good points that support their belief, but you have heard mine. As you can see, the fossil record, which evolutionists use so often to support their theory, is not complete. From this exhibit (show New Pieces to an Old Puzzle), you can see the missing links. Not only from that but you have heard that other species are not complete as well. The whales' fossil record is also incomplete. Where is the proof? Face the facts; evolution is a puzzle that is not yet proven. Ladies and gentlemen, you be the judge. This trial was held fairly to review all the facts and evidence gathered to prove or disprove the theory of evolution. Where is the proof?

Brag Sheet:

For this trial, I was the prosecution lawyer. Not since the trial last year at my law class at Berkeley had I ever worked so hard to prepare before. I badgered all of my witnesses countless times to tell them to finish or turn in their work, though unfortunately some still didn't do it. Over this past weekend, I almost pulled an all-nighter because I kept on reviewing each of my witnesses' information, as well as trying to get more info, until I could make the strongest case possible. My fellow lawyer and I worked hard to find all the evidence we needed for the trial and I kept on thinking what the other lawyer would use against me and what I can you use against her. It was hard to put all the facts together as well as to prepare the witnesses' as best I could for the trial, telling them what to expect and to be ready for anything.

Jackie Torres

Colin Patterson

We don't have enough proof that evolution occurs. Colin Patterson believes that evolution do not occur because of the lack of fossils and evidence to prove it. Patterson was born in 1933. Recently, he died on March 9, 1998. For college, Patterson earned a Bachelor of Science (B.Sc) and a Doctor of Philosophy (Ph.D.) degrees at the London University. He became a zoologist that specialized in fossil fishes at the British Museum. He became a research associate of the American Museum of Natural History in New York. Later, he became a visiting lecturer at Harvard University where he made speeches about evolution. Before he died, he was a senior paleontologist at the British Museum of Natural History. Patterson published a book called "Evolution" in 1978 where he explained about evolution, his ideas, beliefs and arguments. Colin Patterson is fighting against the Theory of Evolution by using his knowledge in science, biology and philosophy.

The theorv of evolution states that the different species that exist could produce new species by mutation. Over time, the newly produced species replace the old ones due to the extinction of species. Species become extinct because the individuals cannot reproduce. Many fossils gave evidence that the species on Earth before were the ancestors of the species now.

Patterson used the Natural Selection Theory against Darwin's Theory of Evolution to explain why evolution is not true. Darwin's theory of evolution states that the survival of species (new/old) can survive. Patterson studied the theories of Darwin and Mendel. He gave examples of the crossing over of the genes.

For twenty years, he had been researching on this theory and it was not until 1981 when it came to him that he didn't know anything about evolution. He have checked the fossils and said that there was too much gap to connect for the theory to be proven right. He checked birds, horses and reptiles.

He believes that there is no real answer to evolution. He said that the theories could have been easily made up as the scientists did the research. There is no explanation to why there are different types of species that somehow have the same characteristics.

Felicia Ross

Michael Denton

Michael Denton is a olecular biologist medical docto ho does not beleve in the theory of Evolution. Which he explains in his book "A Theory in Crisis". Where he dissects a lot of Darwin's ideas. Also he creates alost of arguments which explain why he doesn't believe in "The theory of evolution." For Example

He sat on the mat

He stt on the mat

He sto on the mat

He stoo on the mat

He stood on the mat

This is what he believes evolution is trying to prove. Notice how the sentence are close to the same but different. And how they literally evolve by a little bit. He states that words/sentences don't really go through a process such as this so how could humans. Denton argues that the process is more like

He sat on the mat

He stood on the mat

Both different sentences that have no study of evolution or evolving between the two words. "Stood and sat" I think it's good that he makes this inparticular example between evolution and grammer because it makes a lot of sense to me.

Denton's whole idea of evolution is that it's "Non-sense". And I agree with him because if evolution was true than why do we still have monkeys n ? And why can't C we see them evolving through out the years into humansenton made his argument very similar to Cuvier's old argument about arganisms being functional wholes, and having to change satationally or not at all. Denton believes like Cuvier that "every organized being forms a whole, a unique, and perfect system, the parts of which mutually corresponding and concur in the same definitive action by a repricipcal reaction. None of these p~ n c anQx~,'~rhrn~r-the whole changin " Denton savs that there is only a certain amount of change and that thins can't just undergo gradual change Christine Lee June 1 St, 01 Lawyer's Brief- Prosecution side: Anti-Evolutionist Opening Statement:

In the dictionary, the definition of science is a systematic knowledge of the physical material world gained through observation and experimental materials. The definition of evolution is the slow, continuous process of change in the characteristics of organisms from one generation to the next. Scientist say that it takes thousands and millions of years for an organism to evolve exists. A fact has to be observed and has to be proven a number of times. Evolution is still missing so many gaps and takes so much time to see and observe that it is impossible to prove. Before, there was a skeleton of a caveman that was very interesting. Particularly the jawbone, it was just like a pig's. now it is proven that the jawbones really were a false bone and it was from a pig. If we never had found that out, would they have linked humans to pigs? Just like the way they link humans to apes and all the other animals. Where is the missing link between ape and man? The pictures in textbooks are merely computerized drawings of what man THINKS the missing link may look. What is believable? Science is able to recreate such things like reproducing bacteria and molds, experiment and find cures, explode atoms and make weather models as cyclones and rain cycles. Then why cant science recreate the first man? For centuries, most scientists believed the universe was eternal that there was never a time when matter didn't exist, so there was no need for a God to create it. but the Big Bang changed that. The new theory says that there was a definite beginning. If the universe had a beginning, then it is logic to ask, what or WHO set it going in the first place. But with everything there is a set back. astronomers used the Big Bang to try to explain the origin of stars and galaxies and everything in the universe by natural causes.

Shawn Smith

Prosecution Brief

OPENNING STATEMENT

EVOLUTION. Is it real, or is it a myth? I believe its a myth. The other is a lie that has no information about this form of mystery written all over it. Hi, my name is Shawn Smith Jr., the anti-evolution lawyer fighting for the fact that evolution is not real? How can you believe that true evolution is real? People cant even find proof that this so called evolution is real, telling stories that makes no sense on what it is. Was it a plant or like a chemical combining together to create beasts to apes to man? No! I believe we were created by god, an individual man with awsome power, and an inspiration to others around the world. But no... there some people here in this court room that believes or doesn't in the lord but says that this so called evolution was responsible of dinosaurs changing into what, birds? . . . Evolution. . . its not real. . . so don't believe it. . .not one bit. Who would you believe within 2 people? A person with a story that's fake? Or to the other guy who tells the whole truth ...and nothing but the truth. So, are people saying we are apes or monkeys and that we evolved like pokemon into human beings? Is that what we are ...apes? I know this much, I'm not an ape, nor a gorilla, or a creature that I have no attentions to believe that I was.

So ...now that my statement is almost done, find out the real truth about this session. Find the real truth person who is loyal to tell the real truth.

Statement Questions for Prosecution Witnesses

Statement Questions for Michael Denton

    1. Please state your full name
    2. what school did you attend?
    3. what got you into bileaving that evolution isn't real?
    4. what was the college did you completed?
    5. do you think that evolution is just a made up story?
    6. what information did you find?
    7. did you write a book?
    8. what was the book that you read?

Questions for Michael Behe

    1. Please state your full name
    2. what school did you attend?
    3. what got you believing that evolution is not real?
    4. do you have any proof that you think that evolution is not real?
    5. what is the true purpose of this trial?
    6. do you think that we were created by god and not by evolving?
    7. why do you think that?

Other question for other lawyers

    1. please state your name.
    2. do you think evolution is real?
    3. why do you think that?
    4. do you have proof that evolution is real?
    5. Can an animal for today like a bird or a dog represent a past of evolution?
    6. Are you saying "were a so called monkey or gorilla"?
    7. Do you have any identification or fact stating that evolution has to deal with us being reptiles or dinosaurs turning into sharks or other sorts of animals?
    8. Are you an ape?
    9. Do you know your an ape?
    10. Do you look like an ape.

Janet Nguyen

Statement from Michael Denton

You think talking about evolution will ruffle a few feathers how about writing a whole book about your opinion of evolution. That's what I did. My name is Michael Denton. I was born June 4, 1973 at 3 :51 pm. I work at the University of Otagoi, in New Zealand as a molecular biologist. If you would ask me if I believed that the Theory of Evolution is correct I would say no. I believe evolution is a random search process, that somehow mutation plus natural selection yields results about as random as macro mutation.

First of all the theory of evolution has four points. The first definition says variation exists within the genes of every species. Second in a particular environment some individuals of a species are better suited for survival and leave more offspring. Third, over a period of time change with species gives the way to replacement by new species, as less successful species become extinct. Fourth, the facts from fossils and many other sources, that species one earth has evolved from ancestral.

To begin with I wrote a book in 1985 "Evolution: A Theory in Crisis". In my book I try to show why I believe that the problems are too severe and too intractable to offer any hope of resolution in terms of the orthodox. Michael states from his book "that every organized being forms a whole, a unique and perfect system, the parts of which mutually correspond and concur in the same definitive action by a reciprocal reaction. None of these parts can change without the whole changing."

Nevertheless I assault the evolutionary pattern, but it failed. I point out the evolutionary interpretation of the data have turned out to not be problems at all. In my book I really don't offer support for this characterization of macro evolution. Besides that I discredit myself in the book by quoting Emile Zuckerkandi. People say I seem to harbor much personal confusion that another one of his erroneous claims against evolution derives.

Therefore I don't support the theory of evolution. I think evolution necessitates a process. I think I might have to do more research to find out what really happened.

Helen Lam

Michael J. Behe - Theory of Evolution

Hi, my name is Michael J. Behe. I was born in Bethlehem. I went to Lehigh University and became a Professor of biochemistry. In this trial I am going to talk about how evolution is not true and god created life. I came to the conclusion that Darwin evolution was in capable of explaining data from my own field of biochemistry. I came into scholars who thought the same way I did. They encouraged me to think their ideas were legitimate. They said my idea could be defended, and they agree there was significant problem that was being ignored.

The variation exists within the genes of every species, which the simple results of random mutation and in a particular environment, same individuals of a species. Overtime, change within the species leads to the replacement of old species, are less successful and they became extinct. There is clear evidence from fossil and many other sources that the species now on earth have evolved, or designated from ancestral form that are now extinct. Evolution change in the genetic makeup of a population or species over time.

I am a Roman Catholic and grew up to believe that God made life. That made sense to me so that's why I never thought much about evolution. I was taught in my undergraduate years and graduate studies in biochemistry that all of these fantastically intricate systems that I was learning about were the result of Darwinian evolution. According to my thoughts, a mousetrap wouldn't work if one part of it were missing. How DNA makes protein is a more complex process. DNA is made up of MRA, TRA and genes. If one of those things were missing, DNA would be incomplete. The cell membrane is impossible if one part of it is missing. The cell membrane is put together of channel protein, receptor protein, and marker protein. If the channel protein wasn't there, than food and other molecules can't enter. Receptor protein gathers information about the cell's surrounding. If the receptor protein disappears, then no information can be gather. The marker protein identifies what kind of cell it is. If the marker protein wasn't there, cell can't be identify. The one major thing I don't understand is, how it all happens all at once? Can someone in the future come up with an answer? I had a thesis to complete, so I didn't think much about it. In 1987, I read a book called "Evolution: A Theory in Crisis, By: Michael Denton." It startled me because there were huge and unaddressed problems with evolutionary theory. There was also a very good chance that theory was incorrect. It could not really describe how life came to be.

While reading Denton's book, I realize that nobody else knew about this problem and from then on I became increasingly interested in it..A week later, an issue from the science magazine came and I saw it and thought it was a review but it wasn't. It talks about anti-evolution and warning students. I got really mad so I wrote a letter to the editor pointing out that they should address the intellectual issues involved and not just dismisses something. Phil Johnson saw the letter and wrote back to me and we began to correspond. Ever since, I was invited to a gathering that I had been involved in and that's how I got to be involved into people that was interested in the same problem I was.

When someone is alone, you might be deluding yourself, but when you have colleagues, then you gain the confidence to really explore your ideas. Just the knowledge that there's a large community of scholars who see applications of intelligent design to their discipline gives people courage to explore those problems. So this ground-breaking effort, not so much for any particular idea that comes out of it, but from the knowledge that it gives everybody that they're working in a group.

Bibliogaphy

Microsoft Encarta-Multimedia Encyclopedia 1994

Michael J. Behe: www.origins.or&Lmc/resources/ri9602/behe.html May 20,1999

Michael J. Behe: http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homoages/rossuk/Behe.htm Feb 3, 2000

Michael J. Behe: http://www.am.oriz/behelbehehome.htm June7, 98

Michael J. Behe: http://www.centuryone.com/3493-6.html ®1998-2000

Vanessa Tulier

Lawyer's Brief: Prosecution

Evolution is a theory with no solid evidence. There is no solid evidence to prove if evolution is true or false. There is no hard evidence and not enough facts that has proven data to back up evidence to prove if evolution is true or false.

Order of witnesses..

Amy— Michael J. Belie ~7 h .1 h,,N

Tiffany — Philip E. Johnson gave no questions

Camille — Philip E. Jackson, gave no questions

There are only a few strategies that I will use in the trail. My defense does not seem ready for the trail. One strategy I will use is I will ask questions to make the witnesses doubt their own knowledge and evidence. I will try to make it seem that the witnesses are unprepared and not ready for the trail. I will try to lead the witnesses to saying things such as assume or guess or I don't know. I will also ask questions that I know they can answer to help bring there point out and view they have,on evolution. I will try not to ask questions that will hurt the case. I will also try to ask questions that have a yes or no answer. I will also try not to make the jury doubt the case but to try to understand and be on our side.

Questions I will ask will be for all witnesses to state there name, occupation, what they believe, and what proof they have to prove there theory.

There is still not enough pieces to the puzzle, or not enough hard evidence to prove there theories. I'm not here today to choose side's but to make views of anti- evolutionist stronger and to show why they believe in what they believe in. There is not enough solid evidence or proof to choose a side, but I hope people understand and know that evolution still has missing pieces.

Amy Yu

Michael Behe

I was born in 1952 and grew up in Harrisburg, Pennsylvania. In 1974, 1 graduated from Drexel University in Philadelphia with a Bachelor of Science degree in Chemistry. I did my graduate studies in biochemistry at the University of Pennsylvania and was award with Ph.D. In 1978, I started his research on sickle-cell disease. I'am a professor of Biochemistry at Lehigh University. He studied about Biochemical in science. He didn't believed that the Theory of Evolution was correct and think that there is more then a theory. Belie thinks that cells have structures and processes whose functions are so critical that they could not have evolved step by step. Then the process would be useless. From 1978-1982, he did postdoctoral work on DNA structure at the National Institutes of Health. From 1982-1985, he was Assistant Professor of Chemistry at Queens College in New York City, where he met his wife. In 1985, he moved to Lehigh University where he is currently became a Professor of Biochemistry. In my err, I has authored over 40 papers and one book, Darwin's Black Box: The Biochemical Challenge to Evolution, which argues that living systems at the molecular level are best explained on how he being the results of deliberate intelligent design. Darwin's Black Box was chosen as the 1997 Book of the Year by Christianity Today. My wife and I reside near Bethlehem, Pennsylvania with their seven children. I said that my fundamental assumptions about evolution began to change when he read Evolution: A Theory in Crisis (Adler & Adler, 1986), by Michael Denton, a New Zealand medical doctor and human genetics professor. Since then I had become a prominent critic of the Darwinian view that life as we know it is the result of an unsupervised, unpredictable, natural process.

My Theory of Evolution is that the evolution goes to molecular level. Rather then, everywhere we look inside the cell, evidence is staring scientists in the face that suggests the systems were directly designed by an intelligent agent.

I shows his Evolution Theory by using a mousetrap, my trademark illustration of "irreducible complexity." After pointing out the five parts necessary for mousetrap function, he added, "You need all the parts to catch a mouse. You can't catch a few mice with a platform, then add the spring and catch a few more, and then add the hammer and improve its function. All the parts must be there to have any function at all. The mousetrap is irreducibly complex."

I had many arguements that the origin of intracellular processes of the foundation of life that cannot be explained by natural selection or by any other mechanism based purely on chance. When examined with the powerful tools of modern biology, but not with its modern prejudices, life on a biochemical level can be a product only of with the intelligent design. Coming from a practicing scientist this proposition has been closed. To explain that Darwinian evolution cannot explain everything in nature is not to say that evolution, random mutation, and natural selection do not occur; they have been observed (at least in cases of micro-evolution many different times. Like the sequence analysis, I believe the evidence strongly supports common descent. Evolutionary biologists have recognized that a number of factors might have affected the development of life: common descent, natural selection, migration, population size, founder effects, genetic drift, gene flow, linkage, meiotic drive, transposition the transfer of gene between widely separated species by non-sexual means, and much more. The fact that some biochemical systems may have been designed by an intelligent agent does not mean that any of the other factors are not operative, common, or important."

In conclusion, I that it does allow for a major Darwinian factor in life, but he does appeal to the supernatural for anything that is, at the moment, not easily explainable by Darwinian evolution. This is the dangerous part of it is as soon as the supernatural agent is used to explain something it isn't science anymore, it is religion.

References

The source I got these information from is the following: http://www.id.ucsb.edu/detche/video/biology/behe/interview/behe.html http://www.arn.org/behe/behehome.htm http://www.gospelcom.net/cgi-ivpress/author.pl/author-id=1098

Sam Pon

Evolution: Philip E. Johnson

Hi, my name is Philip E. Johnson. I am against the Theory of Evolution and I also believe that evolution is a Theory and also a Fact. But, theory and fact are different things. When I look at Evolution I believe that things are suppose to "Evolve" in small steps, but there is no evidence of that happening so I think that things mutate in giant steps and not evolve from little to big. Take humans for example, I don't think that humans had apelike ancestors but how do we know? There is no evidence that such things like this happened. So what if they found a couple of skulls and bones but they don't know for sure that this happened. How you know that they were not some other species rather that apes...? Science in the Judge's opinion, must be -1. Guided by natural law. -2. Explanatory by reference to natural law. -3. Testable against the empirical world. -4. Tentative in its conclusions--that is, not necessarily the final word. -5. Falsifiable. If evolution is real then how did the first thing on Earth come to life and "Evolve" to us Humans? I suppose "GOD" created them on this Earth?

Some guy named Charles Darwin who believes in "Evolution" only had ONE possible explanation I think. Scientist just gather information like fossils of skulls and stuff from all over the place and try to put it on "Evolution". They gather like lets say 5 skulls and they try to put it from little to big skulls. How do they know that its in that order and not in a different order? How do you know that something might have caused they skull to be smaller or something? How do you know that they just didn't bump their head onto a tree and it caused it to get smaller or even break a piece off they skull? That is why I don't believe in "Evolution". You don't have all the facts straight and you just assume it.

Camille Fisher

Phillip E. Johnson

I have been teaching law for a very long time now, and I have debating the theory of evolution for 7 whole years. If we were to look into and research what this person wrote you will see that he has been trying hard to prove that many people have depended on Evolution for too long no, and it has no evidence support this theory of evolution. As Darwin states "many people are taught evolution without no basic evidence of tiny kind. Teachers, scientist, books, museums, and movies teach us and show us that there was dinosaurs before we came and it was nothing but dinosaurs living on this earth. I still do not believe in this theory -,of evolution. When we look at the information based on what some people have been saying that evolution is a mindless and purposeless mechanism in which it has only the purpose to change and survive.

Tiffany

Evolution — Philip E. Johnson

The person 1 am researching for this case is Philip E. Johnson. Philip E. Johnson is graduate of Harvard and the university of Chicago. He was a law clerk for chief justice earl warren of the united states supreme court and has taught law for thirty years at the university of California at Berkley. He later published a book called Darwin on Trial and many other books. Philip E. Johnson does not believe that the theory of evolution is correct because many people have depended on evolution for too long and it has no evidence to support what its actually for.

James Aganon

Lawyer's Brief: Defense

Evolution occurred throughout time, especially in the Dinosaur Age. We have gathered evidence such as fossils which were preserved from the time of the extinction and until the time it was discovered. Scientist found out that there were similarities and patterns that proved dinosaurs evolve through time and began another form of living creature. Other evidence such as Lucy, the oldest ancestor of humans, was distinctly alike the humans in present time. She had the same bone structure just as the humans do and this is the most strongest piece of evidence we got to prove that evolution occurred in the beginning of time and changed rapidly within many years because of constant changes in the environment and the earth. We have unraveled our history through discoveries and there is still a lot of things to be found but we are on our way to opening the door for more information about human history and it's exact facts through evidence.

Order of Witness to Testify in the Podium:

Charles Darwin (Alice Ng):

Darwin's theory about certain animals evolving in order to meet their environment standards. Darwin's theory also is the best known theory of Evolution that anyone has thought about in the past and probably in the near future also.

Jean Baptiste Lamark (Guillermo Flamenco):

Lamark's theory of Evolution was proven false by many people, but his agreement that Evolution is true proves the fact that Darwin isn't alone on proving Evolution exists.

Strategy Questions for Defense:

Charles Darwin(Alice Ng):

    1. Please state your full name?
    2. Can you give us your Educational Background?
    3. What is your theory of evolution?
    4. Is there evidence that proves your theory?
    5. Do many people agree with your theory?
    6. Did the trip to the Galapagos Island gave you a good impression that evolution is true?
    7. Is there anything else you want to say to the jury?

Jean Baptiste Lamark (Guillermo Flamenco):

    1. Please state your full name?
    2. Can you give your educational background?
    3. What is your theory of Evolution?
    4. Why did your theory was proven false by my people?
    5. What was your evidence that supported your theory?
    6. Is there anything else you want to say?

Strategy Questions for Prosecution?

Michael Denton (Clarence Williams):

    1. Please state your full name?
    2. Can you talk about your educational background?
    3. Why do you think evolution is false?
    4. Do you have any evidence that can support your theory?

Closing Statement

My conclusion for my case is simply this: Evolution is true no matter how you go out and prove that it's false because there's a lot of things especially evidence that can prove that Evolution occurs. I mean let's go out of the record for once. The way we live today is very different from how people live many years ago, because back then we didn't have to deal with as many environmental changes we do today in present time. One example is clothing in order to meet environmental standards. Clothing back then includes only a piece of cloth to cover yourself with and today we have specific clothing to meet environment standards such as sweaters, pants, and coats. We have been able to cope with warm and cold temperatures by these type of clothing so we have grown from having pieces of clothing back then to various outfits today. Finally, I just have to say that we have come very far today and that's because we have change through the past and that's why Evolution is true. We have all evolve before our eyes. We just didn't get to learn it enough.

Brag Sheet

Well, I was the Lawyer for the Defense and my witnesses are Alice Ng, Guillermo Flamenco, Ricky Saenz, and Clarence Williams. I guess that Guillermo and Alice have really stepped up to the plate especially for this project and I think that they should have more points out of this project than Ricky or Clarence who never comes to classes. I don't mean to be mean, but I got to give credit where credit is due and I believe Alice and Guillermo have earned that credit. For myself, I guess I did everything that I needed to do, even though I got some stuff in a little late. Well, this is it. I hope that you like how we all present our case on Wednesday.

Ng, Alice

Charles Darwin

Hi, my name is Charles Darwin; born on 1809 and lived until 1882. I am a man who believes evolution is true. I couldn't really say I was employed because I couldn't ever hold a job long; so I usually traveled. I hated studying medicine at Edinburgh so I transfer myself to Christ's College, in Cambridge, to study theology. Since my employment never last, I developed a interest in collecting plants, insects, and geological specimen.

During one of my trip as a Native recorder to Galapagos Island, I noticed several different size and shape of birds finches. The birds finches from Galapagos Island and South America where different because the difference in the environment. After noticing the difference, I developed a theory of "survival of the fittest"; which meant creatures that are suited for the environment have better offspring's and their offspring's will be able to have a better chance of survival as well in the same environment. The fittest will evolve rather than the weak. Animals who could survive the environment and other natural animals in nature will develop into a well-known species. I believe my theory is true based on the process of natural selection. Natural selection means the genes that survives are genes that build good bodies; by a good body, I mean a body that is able to reproduce, run away from predators, and survive under ecological changes. Natural selection helps support evolution since species are changing to fit their economic needs also to reproduce better.

My thoughts on evolution is creatures that are successful at reproduction will create more of its kind or type making themselves to become a well-known species. I believe the bird finches changed throughout time so they could survive in certain area or environments. Some birds died out because they weren't successful at reproduction nor catching their pray or have the body to run away from their predators. Successful individuals will replace the old, less successful ones. After understanding from what I have observed, I started writing books such as The Expression of Emotions in Man and Animals, Insectivorous Plants, The Effects of Cross and Self Fertilization in the Vegetable Kingdom, Different Forms of Flowers in Plants of the Same Species, and The Formations of Vegetable Mold through the Action of Worms.

Even though I learned a lot from what I observed, I still had trouble understanding how birds developed different body structures throughout time. I couldn't understand how the inheritance of genetics worked, nor about mutation and genes; maybe it was because it was understood until after I died. If I was still alive knowing about genetics would help me make my theory a stronger evidence because throughout time there has to be mistakes made in the body system over time, making it into a mutation; sometime for the better and sometime for the worst. Species has to be able to pass down their type of blood to their types of species; so the species will always hold some what of the same blood; from all the past generations. If I knew more about genetics and DNA during my time, I could've made my theory a stronger evidence since DNA has to be past down to make future generations and the generations right now.

I believe evolution is true; based on what I learned about bird finches. I learned that birds has to be suited for their type of environment in order for them to have better offspring's. Some species died out because they weren't successful at catching their prey, reproducing, or just running away for their predators. It's all about survival of the fittest; which ever survives or stay alive the longest period of time, will be able to have good offspring's that will also be able to survive in the same location.

References

Class of 2002 Reports. May, 2000. Larmark and Darwin, page 3 of 9.

Darwin. 2001. http://userwww.sfsu.edu/-rsauzier/Darwin.html.

http://dapne.palomar.edu/evolve/evolve Ihtm#top

A Cyber Debate. http://www.pbs.or,g/wgbh/nova/odyssey/debate/

http://home.talkcity.comPhomepopup.html9url=/Iibrarydr/eztoamuse/webdoc5.htm.

Mr. Hartzog's lecture about Darwin. 2001..

Guillermo Flamenco

Jean Baptiste Lamarck

Hi my name is Jean Baptiste Lamarck. I was born on August 1, 1744 and died on December 28,1829. I am an expert in medicine and botany. I have studied many classes of species such as Insecta, Mullusca, and Invertebrates. I have studied Insecta and found how worms, spiders, and crabs are different from each other. I also removed the tunicates and the barnacles in the Mullusca.

Through the different types of species that I have studied, I believe that the evolution theory is true with all the information that I have researched.

I believe that the evolution theory is true because through the study of Insecta, Mullusca, and Invertebrates. I have seen many patterns of how species from today adapt to their environment and how they connections with fossils that I have found. Through the study of many species, I have seen how some species have similar things and some thoughts about why. I think that the reason for some species having similar things is connected with their environment and habitat. I believe that some species had have to have similar things because of their surroundings:, Depending on their environment maybe species had had to have similar things to be able to eat, hide, or fight in that specific environment. If species did not have same similarities in the same environment some would not be able to survive.

I studied invertebrates when many people did not think it was worth studying. Many Museums had collections of Invertebrates, but were poorly organized and classified. I took the challenge to learn and create a new field of biology. I was the first to separate the Arachnida and Arnelida from the Insecta. All the different types of species that I have studied help me prove that the evolution theory is true. I did not believe in extinction. To me species that disappeared did so because they evolved into different specie. I believe that species went through mutations which caused them to evolve and expand. When species mutated and evolved that caused the disappearance of perfect organisms.

I then made a mechanism for evolution which I called "Lamarckism". Lamarckism is more complex then what Geoffrey Saint Hilaire mechanism was. He thought that acquired traits could be inherited. I thought, instead a change in the environment causes a change in the needs of organisms living in that environment. Which in turns causes change in behavior. Altered behavior leads to greater or lesser use of a given structure to increase in size over several generations. Whereas disuse would cause it to shrink or even disappear. This rule-that use or disuse causes structures to enlarge or shrink.

Through many years of research on many types of species I have seen many changes in species and see how it connects to evolution. I have studied Insecta, Mullusca, and Inertebrates. Through studying these kinds of species I have seen patterns and ways of how new species from today connect with species from the past. Many have similar things in common or some have developed new things they need to help survive. As my conclusion I can say that the evolution theory is true and new species are just becoming more unique and in better ways to fit they're on life.

Wesley, Faheem

Lawyer's Brief: Defense

Opening Statement: Evolution is the key to life. Evolution is the answer to all question people ever had to ask. But were ever facts there always mystery. But evolution is going to be an on going thing until it completely prove. But personally there already enough evidence to prove that evolution is true. I believe that we evolved from monkeys. And so do a lot of ,other people in this courtroom believe it. A lot people say apart of lawyer job is to lie, but there not going too be any lying here today.

Order of Witness to Testify in the Podium:

Sarah as Jean Baptiste LaMarck

    1. As being a world renown explorer, scientist, and scholar how did you feel when you were told by Darwin that your theory were not as accurate compare to his?
    2. What were your reaction to this when heard it.
    3. State your full name for the court room.
    4. Where did you receive your education?
    5. Where did you do your research?
    6. What is your theory as Evolutionist?
    7. What did you think about evolution before you made your theory up?
    8. What compelled you to make up the theory of giraffe evolution?

Marco as Kenneth R. Miller

    1. In the book you published "How Did We Get Here" what were your theory about.
    2. State your full names for the court room.
    3. Where did you receive your education?
    4. Where did you do your research?
    5. What is your theory of evolution?
    6. What did you think about evolution before you made your theory?

Gin as Charles Darwin

    1. When you were on the Guapplos Islands what were your finding and how were they important to your theory of evolution.
    2. State your full names for the court room.
    3. Where did you receive your education?
    4. Where did you do your research?
    5. What is your theory of evolution?
    6. What did you think about evolution before you made your theory?

Guillermo Flamenco as Jean Baptiste LaMarck

 

Strategy

I plan to ask educated question, and when they answers them they won't expect. I basically won't catch them in a lie.

Closing Statement:

The DNA of an organism shows so much. It can relate species together, but it can also disprove their relationship. DNA is a very important factor in evolution and it shows strong evidence that makes the evolutionary theory a fact. DNA studies examine the relationship between certain species and they show similarities strong enough to conclude they evolved from each other and indeed came from the same ancestor or parent. Evolution is still a theory until it is proven. But today in the courtroom we did and say a lot to help move that theory just a little bit more to the fact side.

Brag Sheet

The name of my witnesses are Marco Williams, Sarah Herbert, and Gin Louie. They all did there apart in the trail by doing there statements and question. I wouldn't be able to do anything without them by my side. All my job was to put everything together, with I can say is very hard.

Gin Louie

Evolution From Charles Darwin’s Idea

I am Charles Darwin. I believe that I will be very useful witness in our trails. I was a naturalist and sailed to many lands in search of the truth. I was born on the year 1809 at Shrewsbury, England. My grandfather, Erasmus, was -a doctor and had proposed a theory of evolution in 1790.1 had trouble in the beginning of my education but also developed an interest in animals. When I -got older I was sent to Edinburgh University to follow that family tradition and become a doctor. Unfortunately, I hated seeing illness and could not stand the -sight of blood sol went for a Bachelor of Medicine degree. I died on the year -1882 and was buried Westminster Abbey, and near the tomb of Sir Isaac Newton.

From the time my death I discover a theory, which is very accurate, but -still some crititizes my theory. My theory was found when I was on the voyage -of the beagle; I saw similar birds and critters and was from the same family but with different characteristics. I remember that we breed animals to suit what –we need the animals to do. Man breed the bloodhound to lock on the targets -scent, we uses their trait to hunt. We also breed dogs because they are very

Each finches from different areas may have large beaks for eating seed, some with long beaks for eating worm and some with medium beak for eating bugs. I noticed Evolution will also replace the older species with the new ones.

My theory can be read about because I have done research while on -the voyage of the beagle and collect facts about wild life. I studied the plants -and animals of the rainforest and noticed that animals tend to change -because of their habitat like the turtles and the finches. I then thought that -there had been gradual changes since the earth had created to give plants -and animals time to adapt.

Darwin’s weakness of his theory is that he had no knowledge of his theory until her read, Thomas Mathus’ essay on the principles of evolution. My -research was weak because I was totally foreign to the area. Plants, animals, -and rainforest were nothing alike to the English countryside. Also back home I -was taught that god had created everything and how everything was suppose to go.

So in conclusion, Darwin’s theory of natural selection was a reasonable theory and most important a factor to scientists now. Studying evolution was -hard and is still hard, but with Darwin’s help, we have an idea of life history. Also –with the information I have provided help to the evolutionist that think the –genes were mutated with discovering the different species from Galapagos -Islands.

Reference:

Genesis: Life and times of Charles Darwin, http://library.thinkquest.org/18757/darwin.htm?tqskip=l, May 28, 2001

Marco Williams

Kenneth R. Miller

Kenneth R. Miller was a great researcher and evolutionist. Variations exist within the genes of every species, which is the simple result of random mutation. Genes is a very important part in this trail because with out this we would not have any evidence if we didn't know what things were. Another theory of mine is that some species are sub-populated. What this means is that some species are better suited for survival in environments than others. This also means that they will also have more off springs so that it would be harder for those to extinction to happen. Now mutation is also a strong point because of the new species will replace the old species over a period of time. But this sometimes is not bad thing because it can improve over time. There are also some main fossils that make it easier to point out evolution type things.

Okay now I will talk about my theories what I think is that evolution is true nit does happen over time and I have a few good reasons for believing this. To support this idea I will talk about fossils I try to fit bones together and they to see what they interact with and what kind of animal does it looks like and take my best guess. Also studying of genes and DNA types to look at and find out even more accurate things about evolution. This makes me think that evolution is true.

Well now the good points about evolution that I know in those fossils that we find have a good connection in all of the evolution things that have happened over the3 years. Another good point is that the genes and DNA adds up to even more good evidence. Now for the bad points the only thing that makes me have a little doubt of evolution is that we were not there but how are they going to say that it doesn't exist when it does case closed.

The Synthetic Theory

Charles Darwin is probably the most influential man in evolution. His work was of major influence on the life and earth sciences and on modern thought in general. Yet in the beginning biologist argued that he could not prove his hypothesis. Many criticized Darwin's concept of variation, which they exclaimed that he could not explain neither the origin of variations nor how they were passed down to the succeeding generations. Natural Selection is a process by which environmental effects and their affect to varying degrees of reproductive success among species in a group or population with different hereditary characteristics or traits. Darwin's theory promoted adaptations, by maintaining a favorable adaptation in a constant environment, which meant that the specie would thrive. Also by improving adaptation in the direction appropriate to the environmental changes, which meant that this specie would in turn change or adapt to the environment. This explain how some animals have stayed and others have evolved. All this seemed nice but where was the proof of how these so called variations in animals took place. The parts of Darwin's theory that were the most difficult to test scientifically were the inferences about the heritability of traits, or characteristics, because heredity was not understood at that time. The basic rules of inheritance became known to science only at the turn of the century, when the earlier genetic work of Gregor Mendel came to light. Mendel had discovered that characteristics are transmitted across generations in discrete units, now known as genes that are inherited in a statistically predictable fashion. This is where Mendel's Law comes into place. His experiments on peas and fruit flies paved the way for heredity. Experimenting with seven contrasting characteristics of pure-breeding garden peas, Mendel discovered that by crossing tall and dwarf parents, for example, he got hybrid offspring that resembled the tall parent rather than being a medium-height blend. To explain this he conceived of hereditary units, now called genes, which often expressed dominant or recessive characteristics. This helps in fact find the missing piece in Darwin's theory, and later yet genetics gives even a more broad view of how complex things can get. Genetics is the study of how physical, biochemical, and behavioral traits are transmitted from the parents to the offspring. This is all passed through DNA, in which by synthesizing a nucleic acid, deoxyribonucleic acid was found. The synthesis theory in fact proved to be more complex than Darwin himself would have ever expected, yet many questions are still asked. One is if animals really evolved to other species and this is the same for all animals, then where are all the in-between fossils which all the animals of today derived from? DNA passes the information needed for everyone to turn out like they do and how tall he will be. All the information is passed down through cells which in turn shape as and every living thing on this planet. As the new evolutionary theory became enriched with all of the diverse sources, it became known as the synthetic theory. There was three people which in fact make this theory more likely to believe, because they all reviewed a broad range of genetic, ecological, and systematic evidence to show that the synthetic theory was strongly supported by observation and experiment. Their observations and experiments showed that new species usually arise from places which are isolated. Also new species also arise from invasion of a new adaptive zone, which they move to another place and are able to adapt fast and change rapidly. They also found out that plants have similar patterns of evolution like animals, and are very likely to adapt to environmental pressures and opportunities in many diverse or different ways. Extinction and diversification continue today. The evidence showed in synthetic theory is supported very well and clearly shows a more accurate look on evolution.

Sarah Herbert

Jean Baptiste Lamark

I am a great researcher and evolutionist. Who am I ? I am Jean Baptiste Lamark. And I am here to support evolution.

Thing about me well biology is one of my better subjects I am very interested in biology I don't know why but I just got very interested in it for a long time for about 42 years and counting. For about ten years I studied just invertebrates I probably don't know it all but I know a lot. So this is me and now I wil tell you about my theories.

I was the first to separate the crabs, from the spiders from the worms. Plus I broke traditions in removing the tunicates and the binucles from the Molusca. These are the few things that make me who I am today some reasons that people know my name. Jean Baptiste Lamark. What do those words mean to you to me they mean powerful and intelligent. This is why I say that I am one of the top scientist in my profession.

Okay my theories are very good ones because I have a lot of evidence for believing that evolution is true and here are some of them so listen up. Now this is a good one the plants that I study today are some what similar to the ones that we have found years ago. It took them the same ingredients to grow and develop. So this is saying that there were some plants in the past that are now here today. Okay the medicine that I use is kind of the same to. The herbs we use in them have the same use as the old ones still very powerful.

Well now this is kind of strange the are some individuals that say that evolution is not true what evidence do they have to say this? I mean what type of evidence do they have to say those type of things about it makes no sense at all for them to believe. Where is there evidence? Well my evidence is the plants that have similarities to old one this makes me look at the reason why. There evidence? My evidence there is also herbs for medicine that make me believe even more of this. Okay now the evidence they have is none will those who believe have plenty reasons for saying this. That is why I think this is true thank you your honor.

Guillermo Flamenco

Jean Baptiste Lamarck

Hi my name is Jean Baptiste Lamarck. I was born on August 1, 1744 and died on December 28,1829. I am an expert in medicine and botany. I have studied many classes of species such as Insecta, Mullusca, and Invertebrates. I have studied Insecta and found how worms, spiders, and crabs are different from each other. I also removed the tunicates and the barnacles in the Mullusca.

Through the different types of species that I have studied, I believe that the evolution theory is true with all the information that I have researched.

I believe that the evolution theory is true because through the study of Insecta, Mullusca, and Invertebrates. I have seen many patterns of how species from today adapt to their environment and how they connections with fossils that I have found. Through the study of many species, I have seen how some species have similar things and some thoughts about why. I think that the reason for some species having similar things is connected with their environment and habitat. I believe that some species had have to have similar things because of their surroundings:' r Depending on their environment maybe species had had to have similar things to be able to eat, hide, or fight in that specific environment. If species did not have same similarities in the same environment some would not be able to survive.

I studied invertebrates when many people did not think it was worth studying. Many Museums had collections of Invertebrates, but were poorly organized and classified. I took the challenge to learn and create a new field of biology. I was the first to separate the Arachnida and Arnelida from the Insecta. All the different types of species that I have studied help me prove that the evolution theory is true. I did not believe in extinction. To me species that disappeared did so because they evolved into different specie. I believe that species went through mutations which caused them to evolve and expand. When species mutated and evolved that caused the disappearance of perfect organisms.

I then made a mechanism for evolution which I called "Lamarckism". Lamarckism is more complex then what Geoffrey Saint Hilaire mechanism was. He thought that acquired traits could be inherited. I thought, instead a change in the environment causes a change in the needs of organisms living in that environment. Which in turns causes change in behavior. Altered behavior leads to greater or lesser use of a given structure to increase in size over several generations. Whereas disuse would cause it to shrink or even disappear. This rule-that use or disuse causes structures to enlarge or shrink.

Through many years of research on many types of species I have seen many changes in species and see how it connects to evolution. I have studied Insecta, Mullusca, and Inertebrates. Through studying these kinds of species I have seen patterns and ways of how new species from today connect with species from the past. Many have similar things in common or some have developed new things they need to help survive. As my conclusion I can say that the evolution theory is true and new species are just becoming more unique and in better ways to fit they're on life.

Fontanilla, Michael Ryan

Lawyer's Brief For The Prosecution

Opening Statement

Ladies and Gentlemen, I stand in front of you today to finally prove to everybody that evolution is false ...or at least a mystery to us all and that it is just an unproved theory of life without solid evidence to prove it true! As a matter of fact, many scientists have tried many times to prove theory correct but all they came up with were theories and not solid proof. My clients: Philip E. Johnson, a Bible believing Professor of Law; Michael Denton, a Molecular Biologist (Medical Doctor); Colin Patterson, A Paleontologist; Arthur Holmes, a Professor of Geology, are here to prove that the evolutionists have been using their own knowledge and theorize the truth behind evolution. I, myself, believe evolution is false and I say: persuade me to believe in evolution, to do this, provide me with an evidence that is solid enough for me to realize that evolution exists and don't say Pokemon.

Ouestions for Prosecution

Michael Denton

    1. Do you agree with Darwin's theory? Why?
    2. Why do you think that Darwin can't support his theory with his information other than not having enough information?
    3. Have you ever studied Darwinian theory?
    4. What have you discovered based on your studies?
    5. What else have you discovered?
    6. What are the two basic processes?
    7. What does this mean?
    8. Do you find that Macroevolution can occur? Why?
    9. For the record, what is Macroevolution?

Philip E. Johnson

    1. Do you believe in evolution?
    2. Do you believe in God?
    3. What do you have to say about God and evolution?
    4. What else would you like to state?
    5. Do you believe that people who believes in God also believe in Darwinian evolution? L

Arthur Holmes

    1. Is it true that you know Radiometric Dating?
    2. Just for the record, What is Radiometric Dating?
    3. How do you study Radiometric Dating?
    4. Does Radiometric help you in any way?
    5. How does it help you?
    6. Also, why it helps?
    7. Have other scientists try to date rocks?
    8. How do they do that?
    9. Do you agree with their process? Why?

Questions for Defense

Charles Darwin

    1. What is your theory of evolution?
    2. Can you prove that your theory is correct? c
    3. You mentioned that evolution is survival of the fittest, can you tell me how did Goliath got defeated by David when he's more fit?
    4. How about Samson defeating lions with his bare hands when lions are fittest?
    5. How about Moses defeating Pharaoh when Pharaoh is much stronger?

Gregor Mendel

    1. What is your theory?
    2. Can you explain the way that plants and humans have something in common w4h-the-
    3. How would punnett square help predict the outcome of the offspring?

Closing Statement

In conclusion, the defense team have some good points according to their information. But I believe that they still have more information to gather in order for them to persuade people such as myself to believe in evolution. The way that we presented our evidence showed you that evolution is false and not something that could happen at any time now. Evolution is false even though dinosaurs did existed on Earth but the way they "evolved" into birds are still a little out of place or not thoroughly understandable to some people.

Damion Hatfield

Arthur Holmes: Evolution Theory's

My name is Arthur Holmes. I was born in London to a family of very modest means. I struggled all of my life to make ends meet when I became older. Some how I found a way always to make ends meet. I attended school at Royal College of Science in London on a scholarship but I did not finish school because of financial problems. But I overcame and finally began my research.

Based on the research that I have found I do not believe in Evolution. One of my +&eryls that helped me out with the question of do I believe in evolution or not.

Radiometric dating involves the measurement of isotopes of certain elements found in rocks, like uranium or other types of minerals. Some isotopes are forms of elements from the periodic table of elements in which most of the elements differ in mass. Involved with Radioactive Dating, Radioactive isotopes are what help to determine the age of a rock or a fossil. Radioactive isotopes are more than likely to change into other more stable isotopes than the form they are made in. This process is called radioactive decay. Radioactive dating helps because it continues at a steady rate which enables us to date the rocks by measuring how much of the original mineral or element is still there. In the early days when other scientists tried to date rocks they would measure the amount of Helium burned off in the decay process. But when I discovered that lead is teas-the best element to test for. After I came to this conclusion, I would probably spend the rest of my career trying to re-estimate, and the number that I finally came up with was not even talked about with some of the scientists of the 1950's. The scientists of the 1950's finally estimated that the world was only an age of 4.5 billion years old.

Nimpha Torres

Philip E. Johnson

I, Philip E. Johnson was born and raised in a small Midwestern town. I was a professor of law at the University of California, Berkeley, for 26 years. I received my B.A from Harvard and my J.D from the University of Chicago. I've written the book "Darwin on Trial" and more recently "Reason in the Balance. " Reason in the

Balance explores the post-modern philosophy and it's impact on society. Since my writing of these books, I have spoken and debated extensively with experts on these issues.

There isn't enough information to be supporting Darwin's theory because he believes that random mutation are selected and create different forms of life can't be supported with the little information he has. Darwin doesn't give a good explanation on how the species emerged on earth and how they evolve to become that. I believe that Darwin's theory is incorrect.

I refuse the Theory of Evolution and argue Darwinism is profound mistaken. He implies that all evolution had come about by the interaction of two basic

processes. Random selection and natural selection. That means that at the end of the process ends the result of the succession is a new event. Life doesn't exist in the beginning in the world; the production of life is by the fine tuning of the world.

I came to my passionate belief in Christianity as an adult. The whole purpose of Darwinian evolutionary story is to take a position on the religious question, to show that you don't need a preexisting intelligence to do all the work of creation. Of course, God could make some use of random mutation and natural selection in a fundamentally directed creative process. God can act freely as He chooses. God could employ mutation and natural selection or act supernaturally, whether or not His choice causes inconvenience for scientists who want to be able to explain and control everything. Once we allow God to enter the picture at all, there is no reason to be certain a priori that natural science has the power to discover the entire mechanism of creation.

Is there any reason that a person who believes in a real, personal God should believe that biological creation has occurred by Darwinian evolution? The answer is clearly no. The sufficiency of any process of chemical evolution to produce life has certainly not been demonstrated, nor has the ability of natural selection to produce new body plans, complex organs, or anything else except variation within types that already exist. If Darwinian evolution is the only allowable source for life's diversity and complexity, then the shortage of evidence doesn't matter. Darwinian evolution might seem unbiblical to some, or too cruel and wasteful a method for a benevolent Creator to choose, but it is always possible that God might do something that confounds our expectations.

In conclusion, to know that Darwinism is true as a general explanation for the history of life, one has to know that no alternative to natural evolution is possible. To know that is to assume that God does not exist, or at least that God does not or cannot create. To Darwinists, evolution means naturalistic evolution, because they insist that science must assume the cosmos to be a closed system of material causes and effects that can never be influenced by anything outside of material nature- by God, for example.

Eva Chan

Michael Denton

I, Michael Denton, a Biologist, now a senior research fellow at the University of Otago in New Zealand. I now study the human molecular genetics. I've written the book "Evolution: A theory in Crisis." I've had scientific training at Kings College of University of London PH.D 1974.

There isn't enough information to supporting Darwin's theory because he believes that random mutations are selected and create different forms of life can't be supported with the little information he has. Darwin doesn't give a good explanation on how the species emerged on earth and how they evolve to become that. I believe that Darwin Theory is incorrect.

I've study Darwin's theory and most of his study and I disagree with his beliefs in the nature of mutation. He bases his idea that all mutations that have been selected during evolution occur randomly. In evidence about evolution, I argue about how there is no mechanism that could cause macroevolution. I have a different theory and argue that there is no mechanism that could, even in principle, cause macroevolution. Macroevolution is used to refer to any evolutionary change at or above the level of species. It's the changes and splitting of two species or more.

I refuse the Theory of Evolution and argue Darwinism is profound mistaken. He implies that all evolution had come about by the interaction of two basic processes. Random selection and natural selection. That means that at the end of the process ends the result of the succession is a new event. To support my argument, I was also the first to know how to use the FTA ( FINE TUNING ARGUMENT) to prove the design of the universe. Life doesn't exist in the beginning in the world; the production of life is by the fine tuning of the world.

I've pointed out the advanced in microbiology and made new sorts of evidence. Now its possible to compare the basic building blocks--the proteins-of living things. Denton notes that proteins are "all the biology of an organism, all its anatomical features, its physiological and metabolic functions. . ." It is hard to believe that protein structure and evolution could be unrelated.

Proteins are not built directly from genes. Your cells preserve heriditary information by transferring the information in genes into sets of working instructions for use in building proteins. The working instructions of the genes are made of melocules of Ribonucleic Acid, or RNA.

During gene expression, the information in DNA is first "rewritten" (Transcribed) as a molecule of mRNA and then "deciphered" (Translated) and used to build a protein.

A cell can produce large amounts of a particular protein by transcribing a single gene with several molecules of RNA polymerase. The multiple couples of RNA being made in this electron micrograph give the DNA a feathery appearance.

All organism have a genetic code made of three-nucleotide sequences called codons. Codons correspond to particular amino acids and to stop signals, the genetic code is nearly universal.

The unique shape of tRNA enables it to act as an interpreter molecule. Its anticodon complements a specific codon and corresponding to a specific amino acid.

Each ribosome is made of over 50 different proteins and several segments at ribosomal RNA.When translation begins, mRNA is bound to a complete ribosomes so that the start codon is positioned in the P site, ready for the first amino acid at the protein chain.

When both sites on the ribosomes are filled, a peptide bond can form and link the amino acids.

After a peptide bond is formed, mRNA shifts in the ribosome so that a new codon is present in the A site.

After mRNA has bound to ribosomes, tRNA carries amino acids to the ribosomes according to the three base codons. The amino acids are joined to form a protein change. The sequence of amino acids in a gene determines the primary structure of a protein. After a protein is synthesized, it begins to fold into a molecule with secondary and tertiary structures.

In conclusion, there were gaps in the fossil record; protein sequence data prove discontinuity; in the end Darwinists failed to provide evidence for macro-evolution. So based of what Denton have studied he has stated that it could be possible but most likely not to be for such a complex species could mutate at such a short period time. Like the example how DNA makes proteins, it proves that it's more complex and has many steps to change from this protein to the next. There studies have failed to prove the species can adapt in nature and the series changes of intermediate transformations and for it to have a perfect transformation, it probably took a longer time to evolve.

References For Michael Denton

Internet Sources:

Review of Michael Denton's Evolution: A Theory in Crisis www.talteorig_-'cns.oW/faqs(denton.html. Copyright © 1996-1997 by Mark 1. Vulcdc

Origins Research Archives. Volume 15, Number 2. www. arn. orgldocs/orlaages/or 1 52/dent. htm

Book Sources:

Holt Rinehart and Winston. Biology Principles and Explorations. Publisher Princeton University Press Copyright 1998 pgs 183-193

A Theory In Crisis. By Michael Denton. 326-328-25. Evolution theory United State in 1986. Copyright 1985.

Alvaro Covarrubias

Lawyer’s Brief: Defense

No Brief was submited.

Tina Bui

Charles Robert Darwin

"From my early youth I have had the strong desire to understand or explain whatever I observed,- that is, to group all facts under some general laws." That is a quote from I, Charles Darwin. I am the father of evolutionary biology. I, Charles had no natural grace of movement, and was awkward with his hands. I used my hand when I'm talking. My first sparks of interest in natural history were developed very early in his childhood. I was interested I in the variability of plants. When I was nine years old, I went to boy boarding school. I learned the classics, ancient history, and Greek, all of which I found entirely boring. I found my only pleasures there in reading Shakespeare's historical plays, the poems of Byron, Scott, Thompson, and the Odes of Horace.

I, Darwin was to admitted into Edinburgh University, in Scotland - known as having one of Europe's most distinguished medical schools. My father told me to be a long line in doctor and to study medicine. In attended the geology lectures of Professor Jameson but it was boring to me. Then I never read or study that subject again.

On the Galapagos Islands, I collected more than a dozen species of finches, each with a specialized diet and way of obtaining food. The finches of the Galapagos are important and that all 13 species of the genus Geospiza are quite likely descended from a single South American species. Remembering that all 13 species quite possibly originated from a single pair of wind-blown grassquits fewer than a million years ago, their shape and function of bill, as well as overall morphology (body shape and size), has often been cited as the kind of "proof of evolution" creationists swear does not exist. Close examination of Vegetarian Tree, Small insectivorous tree, woodpecker, cactus ground, large ground finch and seed eater showed that all of the species closely resembled the blue-black grassquit, a south American finch species.

"But it may be urged that when several closely allied species inhabit the same territory, we surely ought to find at the time many transition fossils." I saw that by surviving, individuals have the opportunity to reproduce and pass on their favorable characteristics to offspring. These characteristics will increase in a population, and the nature of the population will gradually change. Men looking for traits for dog because they want the trait. Nature select traits for survival. Individuals that poses superior physical or behavioral at tributes are more likely to survive than those are not well endowed. Like breeding domestics animals such as dogs.

The meaning of the Theory of Evolution are the variation exists within the genes of every species, and there is clear structure of evidence fom fossils and many other sources that species now on the earth have evolved from ancestral forms that are extinct. Another meaning is that the environment, some individuals of a species better suited for survival and so it leave more offspring, and over time, change within species become extinct. When I was young, I set sail aboard the Beagle to see the world before returning to England to become a country gentleman.

I came to the conclusion that the Theory of Evolution is a natural process. I do believe that the Theory of Evolution. I believe that the Theory of Evolution is true. But they're are some difficulty and there are some problem that can't solve. Like all famous figures, I have been around by some mythology as well. I was born in February 12, 1809. 1 died in the year of 1882.

Brag Sheet

In the trial I will answer all my questions that I made. I did my essay on Charles Robert Darwin and I went to Mr. Hartzog websites. That website on the internet helps me a lot and I think I will do well on the trials. I use the book for information like the biology book but I couldn't find any information in the book of Darwin on trials.

References:

Internet:

www.starsandseas.com www.yahoo.com

Book:

Biology book

Aaron Lagasca

Evolution (Kenneth R. Miller)

Hi my name is Kenneth R. Miller and I have been learning about evolution for a long time now. I am also a professor in biology at Brown University. I graduated at the university of Colorado, in 1974. I myself is a Christian but I still believe in the science of evolution. With scrupulous evenhandedness, I challenge both sides to re examine their premises and subdue their rhetoric. The shrewd arguments that a new generation of creationists have marshaled against Darwin do not long survive my incisive scrutiny. Indeed, I Warn his fellow believers that those who deploy slipshod arguments and specious science deployed against evolution actually pose a greater threat to faith than do any number of fervent Darwinians. Still, I understand the believers' dismay at the way some scientists have interpreted evolutionary science as a conclusive disproof of God, of morality, and even of meaning in the universe. I may believe in Darwin's evolution theory but I don't approve of Darwin not believing god made evolution or humans. Honest reasoning, I insists, will not convert evolutionary science into a warrant for materialistic atheism. I argue that in a truly open-minded assessment of Darwin's evolution, there emerges a living manifestation of the divine wisdom that made possible a universe of living creatures acting on unscripted impulses. I don't believe that species originated, because the evidence did not is overwhelming. Members of the general public often underestimate just how extensive our current fossil collections are, how detailed individual fossils can be, and how remarkably they document many episodes in the history of life.

In conclusion evolution is true thing in life, animals evolved even humans evolution. I believe evolution is true and as a professor at brown University evolution is a simple thing mammals evolved from other mammals that has similar DNA or skull toning. Some people believe in evolution and some don't but I do and thats all.

 

CHARLES DARWIN

Charles Darwin was born to this world February 12, 1809. He was born and raised in Shrewsbury, Shropshire by his sister when his mother died when he was eight. He went to Edinburgh in scotland. There he stuided medicine which he hated so while he was there he spent most of his class time outside taking samples of bugs and leaves. Then his father sent him to cambridge university where he stuied and earned a degree in theology in 1827. In 1831 one of his professors at cambridge suggested that he go on a trip called the beagle with other classmates.

The beagle was a trip that cruised them from galapago island to the pacific ocean. That's when he first started his studying. He recorded and tok pictures of plants and animals from every spot or stop that the beagle took. His first research on the evolution theory is when they went to the coast of south America. There he took pictures of different finches and plants. Then when the trip reached the galapagos island was when he spotted similarities in the finches from the coast of south America and the ones on galopago island. He believed that the ancestors of the finches must've migrated to the coast of south America.

As he furthered his study he seen that some of the finches beaks where different for the purpose that some ate seeds others ate worms. The differences led him to believe that nature breeded these finches for the puposes of which they needed different beaks so that they can survive out in the world. Then he thought about how humans breeded dogs for the puposes that they want a dog to have. They need certain charasristics for a dog to have. for example take hunting ducks you would need a dog that has oily fur so that they can stay in the water longer. also hunting needs a dog that can sniff out things and that can run fast. Also police and firemen need dogs like this. So in conclusion he believed that nature breeds for survival and humans breed for characteristics. Darwin also did this breeding with peas, flowers, and animals.

So in conclusion charles Darwin believed in evolution because he was the one that wrote it.and that's all.

Sean VanSteen

Gregor Mendel

Gregor Mendel, a monk believed in the Theory of Evolution. Born in 1822, in a region of Austria now part of the Czech Republic, Gregor Mendel was a son of peasants. Mendel learned much about agriculture in his early years, which helped lead to how he made a name for himself later on in his life. He went to the University of Vienna, and studied under Science and Mathematics.

What Mendel proposed was a theory of heredity, that later became a law of heredity. Mendel did experiments using garden peas that later proved theories of heredity. Mendel did many of these experiments with garden peas. Mostly all of his experiments were carried out in three steps. The first step, involved allowing the peas to self-pollinate for several generations. What this did, was ensure True Breeding for a particular trait, so all offspring would display one form of a trait. An example would be a true-breeding, purple flowering plant produced only plants with purple flowers. These plants were called P-Generation.

The Second step was where Mendel would cross7pollinate two varieties from the P Generation that showed different traits. An example would be a purple flower with a white flower. The results of these would be First Filial Generation, or F1 Generation.

The third step was Mendel allowing the F 1 Generation to self-pollinate. Their offspring would be F2 Generation. When he preformed these experiments, Mendel observed two ratios. For each cross, Mendel got F 1 Generation plants that had one form of the crossed traits. The trait that survived was called the dominant one. The trait that had disappeared was called the recessive. When he let the F 1 Generation self-pollinate, the recessive trait reappeared in some of the F2 Generation. Mendel then counted each type of plant in the F2 Generation. Mendel would count each plant and their colors, and develop a ratio for these, for example, he would count 705 plants with purple flowers and 224 plants with white flowers. So then he would conclude an approximate ratio of 3 purple flowering plants to every 1 white-flowering plant. That would result in a 3:1 ratio.This was Mendel's work and this resulted in his theory of heredity

Katie Tong

Lawyer's Brief: Prosecution side: Anti-Evolution

Opening Statement:

Evolution is a very long process; According to Evolution Theory, evolution is a slow process. Evolutionists often use fossils to prove Evolution Theory, however fossils do not show the gradual changes in the organisms. The fossils do not contain DNA so we can not see evidence of mutation. If fossils don't have this basic evidence then it is not true. Scientists are just making an assumption based on the fossils that they have found. The answers they get from the fossils are only guesses only. An assumption. Assumption alone are not enough to prove that evolution Theory is true.

Questions for the Prosecution

Michael J. Behe

    1. Do you believe in evolution?
    2. Why don't you believe in evolution?
    3. Can you give me an example why?
    4. Is there anyway you are going to change your perspective on evolution?

Henry M. Morris

    1. Do you believe in evolution?
    2. Why don't you believe in evolution?
    3. Can you give me an example?
    4. What can you say about the skull of apes and human?
    5. So your perspective on evolution wouldn't change?
    6. What more do you have to say about evolution?
    7. Do you believe in evolution?
    8. What work did you do to help come up with your conclusion?
    9. What proof do you want or need for you to believe it?
    10. What makes you not believe it?
    11. Can you give some examples?
    12. What evidence doesn't proof it?
    13. How come the fossils don't prove it?
    14. So you are not going to change your perspective on evolution?

Questions for the Defense

Kenneth R. Miller

>>>>>>>>>MISSING STATEMENT>>>>>>>>>>>

Gregor Mendel

    1. So you believe in evolution right?
    2. What do you have to say about the relationship between the plants and evolution?
    3. What plants did you used to do your experiment?
    4. Do you have any other reason why you believed in evolution?

Charles Robert Darwin

    1. What clear evidence do you see in the fossils?
    2. You said that fossils shown species on earth evolved from ancestral form that extinct... can you give me an example?
    3. You call yourself father of evolutionary Biology. Why?
    4. What evidence has you gather that led you to believe in the theory of evolution?
    5. How did your observations on Galapagos Island help you believe in the theory of evolution?
    6. In your opinion is it possible that fossils found similar are different kind of species and that the rest died out and it's left with on kind.
    7. Then later human found the fossils and say that one evolved through time to what it is now?
    8. IF YES TO ABOVE QUESTION>>>>> So do you doubt your own theory of evolution?

Objections:

Closing Statement:

In conclusion no evidence was given to prove that Evolution Theory is true. The evidences the witness stated today are same as the evidences the evolutionist, they are all assumptions to Evolution Theory. They said the fossils do not show record of mutation. Like the horse fossils; Although they look similar to each other, but they are actually different species that died out, the bones get fossilized and then scientist found the similarities in their bone structure then they thought the horses evolved from one to another. I am taking the side of anti-evolution and I am now saying that evolution can't be proven true this moment or even few hundreds year from now, because it doesn't exist in the survival of organism on this earth, also each and every individual species exist alone.

Mimi Yuen

Phillip E. Johnson

I am Phillip E. Johnson. I am a Professor of Law at the University of California, Berkeley. I have been teaching for 30 years now. I went to Harvard University and got an Associate Business (A.B.) degree there. I also went to the University of Chicago and got a doctor degree in law (J.D.) there. I am not a scientist, but I still have a lot to say about the Theory of Evolution. I do armchair research, and from my research, I've tonne to conclusion that I am against the Theory of Evolution.

The Theory of Evolution has four main points. It states that the result of random mutation shows in variation. Also, it is a process of natural selection, and that over a period of time, as species change and new species arrive to the environment, it replaces the old species and less successful species that are becoming extinct. Then last, it states that they have clear evidence from fossils and other sources that species do evolve, and that evolution does occur.

I am against the whole Theory of Evolution, but other people ain't. I have read other people's works and research, especially the English Naturalist, Charles Darwin. Some research that I have done was reading articles, books, scientific journals, magazines, etc that other people make on evolution. I have also looked at some fossil records that are considered basic evidence. But I also did my own work about my own point of view on evolution. I wrote books, called "Darwin on Trial" and "An Easy-ToUnderstand Guide for Defeating Darwinism by Opening Minds." I was also in this debate, called "How Did We Get Here?" with Kenneth R. Miller, over the Internet.

I am not here to debate that evolution can never happen and destroy it, but I just want to say that can we actually see it? You've got to show me the hard-core evidence for me to really believe it, but there just isn't any. Should I remind you that evolution is a gradual change? Well, at least that's what the people with the "evidence" say. Okay, you got the fossil records, and I saw them, but are they really true, correct, and reliable? So many things have happened over the few million years-earthquakes, explosions, natural disasters and causes- that can destroy so many fossil pieces. The fossil record is incomplete and the fossils don't show any gradual changes anyway. For example, Lucy, our farthest known ancestor, has a human's hip bone, but an ape skull. We are supposed to be the evolved version of Lucy, but the fossils tell me that we just suddenly evolved into a human skull from an ape skull. Where are the fossils that supposed to show the gradual changes and the small steps of evolution? Does that mean that Lucy is a totally different specie?

People say that we are related to apes because of the 99%, not 1 OQ°to, similarity in our DNA. But we might not even be related to Lucy who has at least some human characteristics. How can we be related to monkeys? We are all different and separate species, with some similar characteristics, but can it really be proven, by evidence and by not beliefs, that we all evolved from some ancestral species?

People just have to open their minds to really see what to believe in, and ask themselves some more questions to really prove it for themselves if it is true or not. The evidence we have here is just not too complete yet for us to really believe it. If the Theory of Evolution is really correct, no one would have, and even needed, to doubt it and go against it in the first place.

REFERENCES

http://www.oriizins.orWmenuilp.johnson.htmi i„~ns.orWmenus/pjohnson.html

Tony Tan

Michael J. Behe

The person I am researching is Michael J. Behe don't believe in the theory of evolution. Michael J. Behen was born in 1952 and grew up in Harrisburg, Pennsylvania. In 1974 he graduated from Drexel University in Philadelphia with a Bachelor of Science degree in Chemistry. He did his graduate studies in biochemistry at the University of Pennsylvania and was awarded the Ph.D. in 1978 for his dissertation research on sickle-cell disease. From 1978-1982 he did postdoctoral work in DNA structure at the National Institutes of Health. From 1982-1985 he was Assistant Professor of Chemistry at Queens College in New York City, where he met his wife. In 1985 he moved to Lehigh University where he is currently Professor of Biochemistry. In his career he has authored over 40 technical papers and one book, Darwin's Black Box: The Biochemical Challenge to Evolution, which argues that living systems at the molecular level are best explained as being the result of deliberate intelligent design. Darwin's Black Box was chosen as the 1997 Book of the Year by Christianity Today. He and his wife reside near Bethlehem, Pennsylvania with their seven children..

As it struggles to comprehend nature, science sometimes has to completely re-think how the world works. For example, Newton's laws apply to everyday objects but can't handle nature's tiny building blocks. Propelled by this discovery, quantum mechanics overthrew Newton's theory. Revolutions in biology have included the cell theory of life in the 19th century, as well as the slow realization in this century that cells are composites of enormously complex molecular systems.

Newton's theory remains very useful, and we can still learn many things by studying whole animals or cells. When explaining the nuts and bolts of the world, however, those views must yield to more basic descriptions. A mechanical engineer can't contradict a physicist on fundamental principles of matter. And evolutionary biology can't overrule biochemistry l on fundamental principles of life. It's not a question of pride--that's just the way the world works.

Curiously, some people seem offended by the way the world works. In his review of my book, Darwin's Black Box: The Biochemical Challenge to Evolution, evolutionary biologist H. Allen Orr unexpectedly attempts to claim priority for his field. He grouses that pre-med students are required to take biochemistry but not evolutionary biology. He plaintively asks "Why is everyone an expert witness when the topic is Darwinism but not when it's biochemistry?" The obvious reply is that the evolution of biochemical systems is itself biochemistry. When a protein sequence changes, when DNA mutates, those are biochemical changes. Since inherited changes are caused by molecular changes, it is biochemists--not evolutionary biologists--who will ultimately decide whether Darwin's mechanism of natural selection can explain life. No offense--that's just the way the world works.

Orr hankers for the respect accorded physicists, and thinks evolutionary biologists can finally lay aside their "physics envy" because "we biologists have discovered the structure of DNA, broken the genetic code, sequenced the entire genome of some species . . ." Orr is like a podiatrist claiming credit for progress in brain surgery. Biochemistry made those dramatic advances; evolutionary biology played no part. I mean no disrespect, but this is not a minor academic turf war--the point is crucial. Anyone who wants to address questions about life's basic mechanisms has to do so from a molecular perspective. Orr does not.

Declining the opportunity to address my biochemical arguments, Orr questions the concept of irreducible complexity on logical grounds. He agrees with me that "You cannot. . . gradually improve a mousetrap by adding one part and then the next. A trap having half its parts doesn't function half as well as a real trap; it doesn't function at all." So Orr understands the point of my mousetrap analogy--but then mysteriously forgets it. He later writes, "Some part (A) initially does some job (and not very well, perhaps). Another part (B) later gets added, because it helps A." Some part initially does some job? Which part of the mousetrap is he talking about? A mouse has nothing to fear from a "trap" that consists of just an unattached holding bar, or spring, or platform, with no other parts.

He sympathize with Orr's muddling of the analysis. The concept of irreducible complexity is new, and can be difficult to grasp for people who have always assumed without demonstration that small, continuous changes could produce virtually any biological structure. Perhaps in the future that assumption will not have such a strong hold on the minds of evolutionary biologists.

Having completed his logical analysis, Orr turns to the topic of gene duplication: "So how does Behe explain duplicate genes? He doesn't." But I do. I discuss them on pages 89-90 of my book, concluding "The sequence similarities are there for all to see .... By itself, however, the hypothesis of gene duplication . . . says nothing about how any particular protein or protein system was first produced." For example, the DNA in each of the antibody-producing cells of your body is very similar to that of the others, but not identical. The similarities are due to common descent; that is, all the cells in your body descended from one fertilized egg cell. The differences, however, are not due to Darwinian natural selection. Rather, there is a very clever, built-in program to rearrange antibody genes. Billions of different kinds of antibody genes are "intentionally" produced by your body from a pre-existing stock of just a few hundred gene pieces. Perhaps because of his unfamiliarity with molecular systems, Orr has trouble seeing that similarity in gene sequences may indicate common ancestry, but is not itself evidence that a system was constructed by natural selection.

Marcel Copeland

Henry M. Morris

I am Henry M. Morris and I am one the most dedicated anti-evolutionist in the world. I was born on 1918, a Baptist civil engineer from Texas. I was a great scholar too. In 19391 received a B.S. and graduated with honor at Rice University in Houston, Texas, I think it was for Hydraulics. Then, in 1948, I went to Minnesota and got his got an M.S. in Hydraulics Engineering. In 1961, after earning a Ph.D. in hydraulic engineering at the University of Minnesota, he and an Old Testament scholar, John C. Whitcomb, Jr.brought out The Genesis Flood. I am still an alive now and he is now what, eighty- three years. I am a retired Former President of the Creation Research Society and a retired Hydraulic Scientist.

I believed in the bible and God. "Who is Jesus", " Jesus is God", that is what he thinks. Mary gave birth to Jesus and she was still a virgin." In the beginning God created Heaven and Earth" (Genesis 1:1), He said that God was the creator of all mankind. Jesus was considered and some type of foreign objects and was tormented and nail to a cross. In the Bible, it is written that he died to wash away our sins.

I do not believe in evolution because if you take a chimpanzees' skull and compare it with a human skull, it looks sort of different. The ape skull has jaws that are way too big to be related to humans. If you see the human skull, you can see that it is much smaller than an ape jaws. Their pelvic bone is extremely large compare to the human pelvic bone.

Nancy Banh

Nancy's Brief: Defense side: Pro-Evolutionist

Opening Statement:

Evolution is the process of change, which means things slowly evolve through time. Life just doesn't mysteriously appear. There is no such thing as a spontaneous generation. Something most have happened for life to begin. For instance, first there were bacteria that slowly evolved, which changed slowly into time, for bigger organisms to live. Now we see fossils through time in each step, showing the staircase of evolution to us humans. As time of living creatures age the earth. Through millions of years, each generation is changed a little in order for animals and plants to adapt to our ever changing earth. Darwin, believed in Natural Selection, which means "the survival of the fittest", that our world can grow stronger, which means stronger traits are being passed down in each generation. This means, we are slowly evolving to the strongest, and that's why we are here. Which means evolution is true.

Strategies for trial: For prosecution:

    1. Listen carefully to Katie's opening statement to see if I can use her information against her.
    2. As the first witness answers questions, pay attention to their doubts and weaknesses.
    3. When you notice the witnesses, weaknesses aim on it, and make them more doubtful.
    4. Lead them and confuse them into answering their questions unsure of their answers.
    5. Ask more questions to the weaker witnesses, doing so, I can make them seem unorganized
    6. Convince the jury to doubt their case

Strategies for trial: For defense

    1. Know what I am saying in my opening statement
    2. Ask questions to witnesses that did their work and research.
    3. Don't ask questions that will give a point to the prosecution side
    4. Be 100% sure of the information I will be using to make my case successful.
    5. Have good, and strong evidence that the prosecution will have a hard time to deny
    6. Bringing in evidence, showing similarities between fossils of different time periods
  1. Use, an objection, "Asked and Answered" if the Lawyer tries to rephrase a question that has already been answered.
  2. I could also use "Non-Responsive", if the question and answer is not related.
  3. Using "Vague", to make the witness, talk more that what they are trying to prove, hoping they will get it wrong the more they talk.
  4. Make up good questions on the way, if the questions prepared aren't good enough.
  5. Make my case strongly believable

Questions for Prosecution:

Henry M. Morris: Marcel Copeland

    1. May you please state your name for the jury, please
    2. Are you a scientist? If not, what are you?
    3. Have you studied evolution?
    4. If you have, from which information did you study it from?
    5. From your studies, do you believe in Evolution? Why?
    6. What do you believe happened, if you don't believe the Theory of Evolution.

Phillip E. Johnson: Mimi Yuen

    1. May you please state your name to the jury.
    2. Do you believe in evolution?
    3. What makes you doubt evolution?
    4. What are the evidence you have to doubt evolution?
    5. You are saying that there isn't enough evidence for evolution to really exist, how can you explain the similarities to the woolly mammoth, to the present day elephant?
    6. Knowing Chimps and Humans, DNA structures are 99% similar, why do you still doubt the theory?

Michael J. Behe: Tony Tan

    1. May you please state your name, thank you.
    2. Are you a scientist? If not, what are you?
    3. Do you believe in evolution?
    4. Why do you doubt the Theory of Evolution?
    5. Why did you study the structure of DNA?
    6. Humans and Monkeys have a 99% similarity of DNA, true or false? If you don't believe in evolution, then there shouldn't be that much of a similarity between those two. By comparing information about their DNA structures, would you agree that monkeys are similar to humans?

Questions for Defense:

EVIDENCE I have for the TRAIL

    1. Mendel's garden peas for Ana #4
    2. Ancestors of South American Animals #2
    3. Evolution of the Horses #7
    4. Lower: Mesozoic Era: Jurassic and Triassic Periods (Cephalopoda) #8 and Upper: Mesozoic Era: The Cretaceous Period (Peteoypoda) #9, I am using this evidence to compare the changes between, lower and upper Mesozoic Eras.
    5. Finches #3, Darwin studied the finches, I would think its useful.

Charles Robert Darwin: Tina Bui

    1. May you please tell the jury who you are?
    2. Do you believe in the Theory of Evolution?
    3. Why do you believe it?
    4. What kind of animal species did you research? Why?
    5. To you, what is the meaning of the Theory of Evolution?
    6. Do you believe in Natural Selection? Why?

Gregor Mendel: Ana Perez

    1. May you please tell the jury who you are?
    2. Do you believe in the Theory of Evolution?
    3. Why do you believe it?
    4. Why did you start breeding peas?
    5. Studying genes, what do you have to say and it, relating to evolution?
  1. What do you study?
  2. Other than studying Heredity, what else do you take interest in?
  3. Do you believe in the Theory of Evolution? If so, Why?
  4. What is heredity?

Kenneth R. Miller: Kimberlyn O'Neal

    1. May you please state your name for the jury.
    2. Do you believe in Evolution?
    3. Why do you believe in the Theory?
    4. What don't you approve if?
    5. Do you believe species originated? Why?
    6. Do you study Natural Selection and Heredity?
    7. What do you know about these two?

Closing Statement:

In conclusion, you can't deny that, evolution could never happen. Comparing the characteristics with the dinosaur's skull and a bird's its to similar to deny it. Life couldn't possibly create itself. There has to be a theory, and "god" popping out of no where and creating everything doesn't seem like a believable one. It was because of evolution that humans are here, by our ancestors. Science is constantly changing and proving theories true and false because we always find new evidence to change it all. Watching Discovery Channel, there was a group of scientist that did a experiment taming wild foxes. Whiling breeding them, the foxes changed, "evolved". Their tails either curled like a Pomeranian, or its tail shortened. Their snouts slowly changed longer or shorter. Me telling you this because, you can see evolution each generation at a time.

BRAG SHEET!

    1. Helped Tina Bui find a site where she could read more about the finches Darwin studied.
    2. Stopped doing my work from time to time, to see if my "witnesses" were doing their work.
    3. Tried to get Kimberlyn to do her work.
    4. Helped my other fellow lawyers on their brief .
    5. Helped Christine Lee in retyping her brief because she didn't double space it.
    6. Worked really hard on my brief, even though I was sick.

Tina Bui

Charles Robert Darwin

I am writing about Charles Robert Darwin. He is a naturalist, principles and explorations, and origin of species.

I seen with my own eyes, I came to the conclusion that the Theory of Evolution is a natural process. I do believe that the Theory of Evolution. I believe that the Theory of Evolution is true. But they are some difficulty and there are problem that I can't solve. Like all famous figures, I have been around by some mythology as well. I was born in February 12, 1809. I die in the year of 1882.

The meaning of the Theory of Evolution are the variation exists within the gene of every species, and there is clear structure of evidence from fossils and many other sources that species now on earth have evolved from ancestral forms that are extinct. Another meaning is that the environment, some individuals of a species are better suited for survival and so it leave more offspring, and over time, change within species leads to the replacement of old species be new species as less successful species become extinct. When I was young, I set sail aboard the Beagle to see the world before returning to England to become a country gentleman.

"From my early youth I have had the strong desire to understand or explain whatever I observed, - that is, to group all facts under some general laws." That is a quote from Charles Darwin. I am the father of evolutionary biology. I, Charles had no natural grace of movement, and was awkward with his hands. I used my hand when I'm talking. My first sparks of interest in natural history were developed very early in his childhood. I was interested in the variability of plants. When I was nine years old, I went to boy boarding school. I learned the classics, ancient history, and Greek, all of which I found entirely boring. I found my only pleasures there in reading Shakespeare's historical plays, the poems of Byron, Scott, Thomson, and the Odes of Horace.

I, Darwin was to admitted into Edinburgh University, in Scotland - known as having one of Europe's most distinguished medical schools. My father told me to be a long line in doctor and to study medicine. In October of 1825, I started medical school at the University of Edinburgh. I attended the geology lectures of Professor Jameson but it was boring to me. Then I never read or study that subject again.

Ana Perez

Gregor Mendel

I, Gregor Mendel was born 1823. I was the second child of my parents Anton and Rosine Mendel, farmers in Brunn, Moravia. I was a brilliant young man and made a great performance at school which made me want to get a higher education. But the problem that my family and I had was that we were poor and we didn't have that many resources to find what I wanted. My family encouraged me to pursuit my higher education. I entered an Augustinian monastery, continuing my education and started my teaching career. I taught the class of natural science to high school students. But at the same time I was interested in plants, but also in meteorology and theories of evolution. The attraction that I was to research was based on his love of nature.

I studied with the P. satiyum. There were many reason that I chose the P. sativum is because there are many ways that it well help in the experiments that I will do with it. Like for example there are many varieties of P. sativum that exist. I made examinations with 32 varieties with the different and noticeable things that the plant had. From the different of varieties I selected seven pairs of the P. sativum that where various traits, such like the color of the flower, the seed color, and seed shape.

My first experiment was to allowed the peas to self pollinate for several generations. I continued this until obtained pure breeding plants for the trait he was investigating. Pure breeding plants produce offspring identical to themselves every time. I chose these plants as the parents of the next step, therefore I called them the P generation. Is also cross pollinated two varieties from the P generation that exhibited contrasting phenotypes which it looked and smell and other physical features. The offspring of this cross the first filial generation, the F 1 generation. There was many differences like the number of the offspring which was that the offspring resembled just one of the parental traits like the color purple. For the finally experiment that I did was that I allowed members of the F 1 generation to self pollinate. The offspring of this breeding were called the F2 generation.

This generation resemble both the parental figures. I counted the numbers of offspring with each of the parental phenotypes in this generation.

Sophia Su

Sophia's Brief Prosecution Side: Anti-Evolutionist

Opening Statement:

As time passes by we see a lot of changes through the earth. We think, how did these things happen? How did we get here and so forth? But for evolution it goes through a lot of study to find out the true facts in life, but I believe that evolution is just a natural process. It happened by a process we can't yet find out. We haven't found any proven evidence to just say that humans evolved from apes. We must show proof, evidence that evolution has happened.

Strategies for trial:

Defense:

    1. Carefully listen to there open statement so you can try to mislead her during the beginning
    2. Ask more questions for the weaker witnesses
    3. Try to use "vague" when witnesses is not answering questions with reasonable details
    4. Make the jury doubt there case.

Prosecution:

    1. Know your opening statement
    2. Be 100% sure about your answers and information
    3. Have strong evidence for defense side
    4. Bring evidence about religion belief
    5. Have a strong closing statement
    6. Do not make the jury doubt your case

Questions for Prosecution:

Michael Belie: Roshanna

    1. What's your degree in?
    2. What was one of the books you wrote?
    3. What was Darwin main point of the book?
    4. What example or relating of the cell membrane can you say?
    5. In your opinion, could the cell membrane have form in 2 and a half million years ago?
    6. Do you believe that evolution is true?

Michael Denton: Tristan

    1. Please state your name
    2. What college did you attend?
    3. What college did you receive scientific training?
    4. Why don't you believe in evolution?
    5. What's your opinion on mutation?

Philip E. Johnson: Stevon

    1. What is your career?
    2. What make you doubt evolution?

Questions for Defense:

Charles R. Darwin: Illeana

    1. Please state your name
    2. What was your theory that evolution exists?
    3. What did you major in?
    4. What kind of observations did you made when you where at Galapagos Islands?
    5. How does your theory goes against genetics?

Gregor Mendel: Ashlyn

    1. Please state your name.
    2. What did you study?
    3. Why did you start breeding pea flowers?
    4. Do you believe in the theory of Evolution?

Closing Statement:

There are still not enough given evidence to prove if evolution is true. I think through my own philosophy about evolution is still a missing. There simply isn't enough proof that evolution exists. All the evidence to show us is dug up bones, and to compare us to apes is just dumb. All the theories the Pro-Evolution case always brings up more and more questions. Theories like Darwin's doesn't show the human race progressing that accurately. So, because of just lack of evidence, you cannot say evolution exists.

Brag Sheet:

For this trial I was the prosecution side lawyer, I try to organize my group and get every information about this trial at the least about of time. Even though my group had done some last minute research I was still able to come up with this brief.

Roshanna Newt

Michael J. Behe

State my name, doctor J. Behe My degree I have a p.h..d What was one of the books I wrote Darwin's black box What's the Darwin's main point to the book. Complexity. What example or relating of a cell membrane ell membranes a complexity in my own opinion, could be the cell membrane form in tend and a half million years ago. So believe that evolution is true.

Michael J. Behe Michael believe that the book he wrote Darwin's black book is all true. Live can only be the product of intelligent of design. Behe has made a very important statement introduced a powerful concept called irreducible complexity. Every part of the systems are necessary for the functioning of the whole system. Michael has came close to inventing irreducible complexity. Maybe ever irreducible complex system and this example is another famous problem. The chicken and egg problem. No chicken without egg, no egg with out a chicken. Complexity is just a very large gap in our knowledge cause a gap in our knowledge is just natural to a theory. Michael Behe dose not only philosophies about mousetraps his metaphor for an irreducible a complex system he gives concrete biochemical an examples such as the bacterial flagellum. To him evolution is a biological theory , not a philosophical theory. However Michael Behe unintentionally show clearly why Philip Johnson is wrong in claiming that the main theory is a good lesson is that the evolutionary is true. Every part must be necessary. If Behe fails to come up with a case of irreducible complexity. That stands all criticism then Darwinism survived another failed falsification. This is the sort of positive evidence for a theory. It is thoughts and ideals that really count. I over looked Behe books and really seen a few passage and, I found so much information not if he is alive or not. If he wrote his book in 1996. The black box then I think that he is still alive. He is know responding to his work on his book.

Tristan Joseph

Michael Denton

Hi my name is Michael Denton. I am a Senior Research Fellow in Human Molecular Genetics at the University of Otago, New Zealand. I received scientific training at Kings College of the University of London (Ph.D., 1974), and published over 65 papers in the scientific literature. I am the author of Evolution: A Theory in Crisis (Burnett Books, London, 1984), a book both widely praised and widely attacked for its dissent from neo-Darwinism.

I don't believe in evolution because there are so many highly complicated organs, systems and structures, from the nature of the lungs of a bird, to the eye of the rock lobster. For which I cannot conceive of how these things have come about in terms of gradual accumulation of random changes.

The fact is that the majority of these complex adaptations in nature cannot be explained by a series of intermediate forms. Common sense tells me then must be something's wrong. I looked at the fossil records I see gaps in the records. That's tell me that there is no smooth gradual changes in the fossil which is telling me that evolution can not be true. Okay I can stand the transition in the history of life in the early horse period. One to five toed horse nails can perhaps be explained in terms of gradual evolution change.

The most serious objection I have is with the nature of mutation. Darwinism is based on the idea that all mutations, which have been selected during the course of evolution, were, when they initially occurred entirely random. Mutations are random, and when and organism has a mutation to it that's purely fortuitous.

Stevon Cook

Philip E. Johnson:

No report was submitted.

Danny Yu

LAWYER'S BRIEF: Defense

Opening Statement:

I am Lawyer Yu and I will be representing the defense. Let's start off with an easy question. What is evolution really? The dictionary tells me it is a process of continuous change from a lower or simpler to a higher and more complex state. Today, we will be examining the main evidences of, which can prove the evolution theory to be true. Sure it's a theory now but give scientists a couple of snore years to dig up more evidences and soon we won't have an evolution theory. We will have an evolution fact. My witnesses, Mr. Charles Darwin, Mr. Donald C. Johanson, and Mr. Gregor Mendel, will back me up to prove that the evolution theory indeed exists.

Strategies for trial:

For Prosecution:

    1. Pay attention to what the witnesses say and try to find weaknesses.
    2. Are the witnesses ready and sure of what they are saying.
    3. Trap the opposing witness into saying I think, assume or guess.

For Defense:

    1. Ask easy questions.
    2. Make sure my witnesses answer my questions the way I want them to.
    3. Be bold and strong.
    4. Object when prosecutor asks something that has no relation to the case or too personal.

Questions for Defense:

Gregor Mendel (Ashlyn Williams):

    1. Please state your full name.
    2. What did you study?
    3. What have you learned?

Donald C. Johanson (Anthony Banks):

    1. What is your name?
    2. Does the theory of evolution exist?
    3. What have you done to prove it?
    4. Mr. Johanson. can you take a look at these two diagrams please? Here is the Lucy fossil and here is a human skeleton. When you found the Lucy fossil, did you see anything in common between Lucy fossil and a human skeleton?
    5. Here is a gorilla skeleton. When you compare gorilla skeleton to Lucy's fossil, what is similar?
    6. Is it possible the Lucy fossil is a transitional fossil in between gorilla skeleton and human skeleton?

Charles Darwin (Illeana Merino):

    1. What is your full name?
    2. What is your profession?
    3. What is your position on evolution?
    4. What research have you done for you to reach that conclusion?
    5. Can you state the four points that you have made for evolution?

Jean le Baptiste Lamark (Kenisha Roach):

Questions for Prosecution:

Michael Denton (Tristan Joseph):

    1. So you disbelieve in evolution, correct?
    2. You seem to write a lot about my witness, Mr. Darwin. Do you have anything against him?
    3. Do you believe in God?

Philip Johnson (Stevon Cook):

    1. Do you believe in God?

Michael Behe (Roshanna Newt):

    1. Do you believe in evolution?
    2. Do you believe in God?

Michael J. Behe (Omar Bubakar; Did not call):

Closing Statement:

Ladies and gentlemen of the jury, today we are here in this court, debating about whether the evolution theory exists or not. Is it really necessary? From Mr. Johanson's research on Lucy, we can see the similarities between humans and apes. Human DNA and chimpanzee DNA are almost identical. We are 97-99% the same. If there wasn't evolution, how did we get here? I like the quote "Seeing is believing". How can you believc. in a "God" when you nor anyone else has ever see» him? Sure you might say well I can't see evolution so I won't believe in it either. But think about life. Can you see atoms? Can you see germs? Evolution is one of those things that exist but cannot be seen through the naked eye. We need to stop listening to people who won't believe in evolution just because it cancels out the existence of God. Face reality, evolution exists.

Brag Sheet:

For this trial, I was the defense lawyer. I answered questions that my fellow classmates had, the best I could. I lie I ped everyone stay on track and tried to get everyone to do his or her work. I also answered So phia's questions about what to do and have from her witnesses because she was absent one day.

Patrick Banks

Donald C. Johanson

Hi my name is Donald C. Johanson. I was born on April 28, 1943. Through out my life I became a member of the Explorers Club. One of the schools I had attended was the university of Chicago. As I was getting older I studied many things. The first thing I studied was human palentology. Then I studied two more things and that was significant fossils and Human Origins and I also developed the distinguished laboratory of physical. When I was about thirty, thirty five I found a partial skeleton that was very old in a remote region of Ethiopia in 1974.

I provided a vivid behind the scenes account of the history of paleoanthropology and the colorful, eccentric characters who were and are apart of it. I am the founder and president of the Institute of Human Origins in Berkeley California. I lively accounted of the extriordinary discovery of Lucy one of the oldest, best preserved skeleton on any walking human ancestor ever found.

When I was in High School I was told by my counselor that I should forget about college. I had done so poorly on my SATs that the counselor did not believe that I was capable of performing college level work. So I just ignore the counselor advice and I pursed a Higher Education and got a PHD in anthropology from the University of Chicago. In 1994 I hosted and narrated an episode of Nova. I have published nearly 100 scientific papers and books. I am now one of the dominant figures in the world of paleo-anthropology. I have spent my whole career looking for clues and questions for science. When I found the Lucy fossil did I see anything in common between lucy fossil and human skelton? They can walk on both feet comfortable. When you compare a Gorrila skelton to lucy fossil what do they have in common? There skulls are similar and they both can walk on two feet.

Ashlyn Williams

Gregor Mendel

Hi. My name is Gregor Mendel. I am an Augustinian monk born and raised in Brunn, Moravia. In July of the year 1822 I was born, the second child to my two poor parents, Anton and Rosine Mendel who were both farmers. As I went through my life I studied things that range from theology to philosophy.

When I first began using peas to try and study inheritance I had a few problems. The main thing that was holding me back was the fact that I had failing eyesight and then when I had finally decided on one theory, I looked at it more and more and I found out that it wasn't entirely correct (close but not correct.) From that I was able to come up with a more accurate theory that I thinks works better. I published a book on the things that I found called, "Experiments in Plant Hybridization" written in 1926. I did many things that I tried to get recognized for but none of the recognition really came until many years later (34 years later to be exact). When it came it was brought up by: Correns, De Vries, and Tschermak, they further investigated what I did and then my work became the basis of genetics. I agree with the theory of evolution because it comes very close to the things that I think about it.

In conclusion, I have studied many things on my lifetime and many of them went unrecognized for quite a long time. When they finally became recognized they became the basis of all genetics and they are now a very important part of the theory of evolution in itself. I believe that by observing inheritance you can use it to prove evolution. Evolution is things occurring over time, and inheritance is just studying genes to try and learn things about families and what causes things in their family trees. If you look at a family history you can tell many things about them. You can look at things that they have and use them to determine things that you have, and things t hat your children might get. You can even tell things like what animals may result if you mix two animals together. Overall, you can tell that studying genetics and inheritance and things like that you can tell a lot about the world in general.

Ileana Merino

Charles Darwin Theory on Evolution

I Charles Robert Darwin which made the theory that evolution exists was born February l2, 1809 in Shrewsbury England and died April 19, 1882 in Kent, England. My father made me attend Shrewsbury school which I didn't care about so I was looked as a bad student. When I was 16 I went to study medicine at Scotland at the University of Edinburgh. I met zoologist Robert Grant and geologist Robert Jameson. Grant introduced me to marine animals. But I didn't care about my education at Edinburgh either because I didn't like studding medicine so I went to Cambridge University so I could study divinity but that wasn't any better because I would skip class to take walks-and go hunting and doing outdoor activities. But I got interested in science when I met botanist John Stevens Henslow. And I became a naturalist. I took a trip to sail in the HMS Beagle .to South America and the Pacific. In that trip I made a lot of observations on species on some places compared to them in other-places. When mentioning evolution either -some people believe in it or others don't. But there are those who are-confused about it. I would like to explain to you why I think evolution exists.

Taking that trip made me realize many things which made me make the theory of evolution. I believe that every specilhas changes in then. That some species were better adapted to certain environments making the offspring better. Species replace species if they aren't successful. There is evidence that species have evolved to make themselves better, making the other species extinct.

I made the theory of evolution by making observations. When I took the voyage on the Beagle I made observations on ostrich and how ostrich from Argentina, Uruguay and other places had differences, like the height and the color. I also observed different birds like finches and made observations on the different tortoises on the Galapagos Islands which lead me to a point in the theory that some animals were better adapted to certain envirmmente One of the things that I based my theory on was natural selection where I think that species who were not successful were replaced by new generations that didn't have all the same traits as the first one making it more dominant. I also studied self pollination on plants and noticed that plants are stronger when they have both sexes. I noticed that flowered plants with petals that attracted insects were more colorful than those pollinated by wind. But things weren't always great.

Though my work was great towards the end my life I had problems with my health. I was believed to have had the Chagas disease that I might of gotten from an insect from the trip to South America which caused me to have pain, vomiting and other symptoms which made people criticize me. But since lot of my research was made in my earlier years and had strong results, my illness didn't really make an effect on my work. So as you can see I was a naturalist who made a lot observations and research on different things of earth because I first was a geologist, zoologist and then I became interested in botany. I based most of my theory on natural selection which made me think that evolution did exist.

Gladys Vilchez

Lawyer's Brief: Prosecution – Trial Outline

Opening statement:

Evolution is the theory on how life started, but is the theory of evolution a fact. The evolution theory is a theory that is full of gaps it is a theory that contradicts itself and other scientific laws such as the Law if biogenesis. Evolution states that we evolved from monkeys but we as humans have morality a distinct characteristic of humanity. No other animals does, so there is a undeniable gap between people and animals. Evolution doesn't have any real concrete proof which makes it a theory. The following witnesses will talk further more about evolution and their opinions and findings on it.

Questions for Prosecution

Michael Denton (Sam Liu)

    1. What is your name?
    2. What degree in science do you have?
    3. What is your occupation?
    4. What is your take on the evolution theory?
    5. What influenced you to write Evolution A theory in Crisis?
    6. Why question the theory?

Michael J. Behe (Denaida Houston)

    1. What is your name?
    2. What do you do?
    3. What is the name of your book?
    4. What is your theory and where did a get it from?

Phillip E. Johnson (Jaurel Juliao)

    1. What is your name?
    2. What university did you go to?
    3. What did you study?
    4. What can you tell us about your views on Darwin's theory?
    5. What evidence do you have to back up your theory?
    6. What would you say about the progressive change in animals in different areas?
    7. Can you say this is evolution?
    8. What else can you say about evolution?

Cross Examination

Charles Darwin (Kenny Khounpangna)

    1. What do you think about Mendel's findings?
    2. If all the information for the development of each organism was already encoded in the DNA of its parent, then how can an organism reproduce something that is not of its kind or in other words evolve?
    3. You came up with the theory of mutations, so can you please explain to me how a mutation is capable of producing evolution if a mutation can only alter and effect the existing structure of genes? Which in other words means that mutation can only affect something that is alive.

Jean Baptiste Lamarck (Jennifer Nguyen)

    1. You say "The presence of body parts in some animals that are not used but show similarities to ancestors is proof of natural selection". Right?
    2. But there is no evidence in the fossil record of one kind of creature becoming another kind, there are no transitional links. For example, not a single fossil with part fins part feet has been found. So how can the presence in some animals be evidence in natural selection?

Donald C. Johanson (Andy Ng):

Gregor Mendel (Nick Horn):

Kenneth R. Miller (Derell Young):

Conclusion:

Evolution states that animals evolve into different animals, but that is not true because all the information for a particular animal was already encoded in the DNA of it's parent. They must reproduce after their kind. There has never been observed any changes across kinds like a dog becoming a cat. Changes produced in other body cells are not transmitted. For example if a women where to lose her finger her daughter would be born with a finger right? Therefore if an ape learned to walk upright it could not pass that characteristic on to its descendants. The law of biogenetics clearly states that life must come from life but evolutionist ignore that law when it comes to the creation of earth. In conclusion evolution is a theory that contradicts itself and other scientific laws. Regarding the theory that we evolved from monkeys since we are 99% chemically similar to apes then why do we dominate the whole world if we are 99% similar. Come on now think about it?

Strategies For Trial

For Defense

    1. Read over their statements and see how much information the know.
    2. Pay attention to how sure they are when they answer their lawyers questions.
    3. Ask question that provide a lot of information.
    4. Ask questions that I know they will not be able to answer easily without knowing a lot about their character.
    5. Make them seem clueless.

For Prosecution

    1. Ask simple questions in the beginning.
    2. Ask questions that they know real well.
    3. Ask questions that will allow them to show off what they know.
    4. Make sure that they seem as smart an prepared as possible.
    5. Examine the strongest witnesses first and last and the not sop prepared witness in the middle.
    6. Show evidence that will support my statements.

Brag Sheet

For the trial I have done so much to help the other team members in my group and even in the others. Everyday I made sure something was getting done by my group members. I helped them when they had questions I even helped them get some evidence. I helped other people from the other groups by asking them questions that will probably be asked to them. I helped my group members stay on task and also helped the lawyers when they had questions.

Sam X Liu

Michael Denton

My name is Michael Denton and I am a molecular biologists who spend decades prowling over the theories of evolution both supporting and contradicting at the same time. I have a degree in doctors and I live in Australia and is a senior researcher in Human Molecular Genetics in the Otago University.

There are many people who are angry at me for contradicting the words of the Great Darwin. They argue that I had contradicted the man and had not correctly perceive the information myself before I came up with my thesis. I am against the prove of evolution because, "The Origin of Species" can not prove the factor of macroevolution and at the same time the theories themselves are factors, of impossibility. A critic of mine once said, " The predictive power of evolution at the macro-level is low," Even he agrees that evolution can not explain the design and creation of species. The thing is macroevolution is a factor of impossibility, because in order to evolve one specie to another it will be almost a factor of impossibility under Darwin's explanations. For example, the genetic level of changing two points, A to the letter B, the possibility of that is very low and nearly impossible. Evolution can not explain these factors and is therefore contradictory to the explanation of creation in life, what is more reasonable is that these variations that exist in species are actually a variation in the design rather than a variation created through evolutionary change.

In the creation of "Evolution: A Theory in Crisis" I have used examples from Emile Zuckerkandl's research and the very research of Cuvier to reach a plausible explanation that what Darwin wrote is perhaps an incorrect analytical dissection of those evolutionists before him. Darwin uses two of the most important points to illustrate his perception of evolution. First of all he uses the fact of random mutation, which means the species are created randomly and the second in which he cites natural selection in which out of the randomly created creatures only the most fittest are naturally selected. The fact is if you look carefully at the design of many species that have come and gone, their molecular structures are too complex to be intercepted as a randomly created process. Imagine the first bacteria to be laid down by the process of random mutation, it's complexity is inevitable and just that certain elements needed to be put together and placed together and is impossible if they are just a factor of chance to be created. That is why I hugely question Darwin's accuracy on these accounts which brings such great weakness to his theories and to his philosophy. Cuvier once said that "Ever organized begin forms a whole, a unique and perfect system. Which parts of which mutually correspond and concur in same definitive action." Such perfection is impossible to achieve if every point and process of the organic bodies were outcomes of a gamble of chance.

Through out my research, I have both examined the work of other scientists and had reinterpretated certain species in order to find and discover that much of what was done by Darwin was quite inaccurate. In Emile Zuckerkandl's research she listed an important fact that "most functional proteins are difficult to reach interconvert series of succeeding amino acids to mutate." The life structure of even the most simple parts are difficult to mutate and change and imagine a large size 70 foot dinosaur with a body mass in tons, the impossibility is even greater and would have been impossible for it to mutate into a 3 feet bird. It would involve a massive reorganization which involves redesign, respecification, and the reorganization of all interacting component subsystems which is a fact of near impossibility.

My believe is that the world should open its eyes once more and look again at evolution. After all it's a hundred year old theory and after all these new scientific findings and discoveries and statements of understandings why can't we use our new findings to once again check the conjecture made long ago. If people can accept that path, perhaps we have the ability to advance our knowledge and ourselves in the better world of evolution. Darwin has came up with a very interesting concept, but the contradictory factor of his theories is that he has built an explanation that is nothing more than a giant lottery of the natural world.

Jaurel Julao

Phillip E. Johnson: Professor from UC Berkeley

Phillip E. Johnson is a professor from UC Berkeley who travels America running lectures on his evolution beliefs. He has written such books as "Darwin On Trial" and has run Internet debates such as "How do we get here?" There's no physical or tested by scientific method that the evolution theory is true, and the only evidence to show for it are bones and how similar they are to us. We only have a few of the same strands of genes that apes have, but to say we have a direct relation to them makes no sense. He also believes evolution is seen in big jumps, there's no proof, not even fossil proof, that the human species slowly progressed, for that matter any other species progress at a slow rate. He states that adapting to an environment doesn't count as evolution, more as outer change from the exposure to the land, kind of how tanned skin is. He doesn't doubt that evolution can't be possible, but without proper proof it's not, but that also means that there's no proof either of if we were actually created by a higher being. Stating this creationism has even less evidence of it's existence, and even more outlandish.

People see evolution in big steps, if you can see the evolution chart that Darwin made, each change becomes more drastic than the next, and how is that? You see a small hunch-backed hairy ape, progress into becoming a human man over several million years, the thing is, that there is no proof of this. There's no proof and no determination of how long it will take for a species to change that drastically, no other fossils showing it's slow progression. What will cause a species to change that drastically? The fossils seen in Darwin's chart have more close relation to apes and makes more sense that their ancestry than our ancestry being very similar to theirs. All in all there's no proof of progression.

Apes aren't nearly as intelligent as people (although there's exceptions). Humans are one of the few species that are distinctively different from each other. Species of apes all look fairly same. Just because we have similar genetic strands of apes, doesn't mean we have a direct relation, again there's not enough proof to show us that. The bones recovered by archaeologists are more closely similar to today's apes than us. The only thing we can really say when we recover bones is the shape of their body and how they used it, we don't know how much hair it might have had, we can't say that they never had hair in certain places, the texture of their skin.

So how do go about testing evolution? We don't have the technology nor the know-how to evolve a species right before our eyes, the only thing that's ever shown a theory to evolution were bones, bones, and more bones. He doesn't veer to either side of evolutionism nor creationism, but there's no proof that either is correct, the thing is evolutionism doesn't have enough evidence to support that it's true (that's why it's a theory). For something to be seen as true, we will have to test it out.

Tak Wong

Lawyer's Brief: Defense: Pro-Evolutionist

Opening Statement:

Evolution has gone through many stages to get to what we know today. From the facts that we see from the past to the present, many changes occur. Many species did not extinct by accident, but by the environment they live in and other species interacting with them. We do have enough information to support the theories that we found and the trend of changes that the species are going as they get younger. In the evolution of horse (show evidence 1), it showed how the feet of horses get bigger to help them run faster and to catch their prey easier. This proved how genes change in each species, which is evolution.

Strategies for trial:

For defense:

    1. Ask questions that witnesses can easily answer and explain clearly.
    2. Let witnesses know the questions ahead of time so they can prepare to answer them.
    3. Ask questions that are easy to understand to make sure the jury knows what you are talking about.
    4. Try not to give pressure on the witnesses.
    5. The witnesses as well as the lawyer should look confident during the trial.
    6. Do not use witnesses that did not doing any research to avoid ignorance during cross-examination
    7. Use evidences to support the witnesses to make their views stronger.
    8. Avoid using words that doubt the case.

For prosecution:

    1. Ask questions that the witnesses may not know or may not be able to answer.
    2. Concentrate questions on things that help your case.
    3. Ask questions the witnesses don't want to answer, that are on your side.
    4. Try to make the witnesses look less confident, by targeting them on their weakness and asking follow up questions.
    5. Make eye contact to give pressure to the witnesses.
    6. Read their witness statements thoroughly as well as listen carefully on what they say so you can target them when they say things that do not match, ask for explanations to make them look less confident.
    7. Do not let the witnesses know the questions ahead of time to surprise them and make them seem unprepared.

Questions for the defense:

Jean Baptiste Lamarck (Jennifer Nguyen):

    1. What area did you major at school?
    2. What is your current career?
    3. What theories did you find?
    4. Show evidence 3: This is one of the theories Lamarck found. It shows how a giraffe's neck gets longer from stretching it.
    5. How can you prove your findings?
    6. How did your theories relate to evolution?
    7. Do you believe in evolution? Why?

Donald C. Johanson (Andy Ng; May not call to trial):

    1. What is your current career?
    2. What did you find in your studies?
    3. What in Lucy is important to your studies?
    4. Do you believe in evolution? Why?

Gregor Mendel (Nick Horn; May not call to trial):

    1. What theories did you find?
    2. How did you come up with your theory?
    3. *Show evidence 4: These are some of the finding of Mendel. It showed that the dominant form always had a higher ratio than the recessive form.
    4. In what ways did you studies similar to the evolution?

Kenneth R. Miller (Derell Young; May not call to trial):

    1. What career field are you in?
    2. What are you interested in investigating?
    3. Do you believe in evolution? Why?

Charles Darwin (Kenny Khounpanga)

    1. What area did you study at school?
    2. What were some of the theories that you find?
    3. How did you come up with your theories?
    4. *Show evidence 5: This is an evidence of the different type of finches Darwin found that have special beak to help them eat.
    5. How did your theories relate to evolution?
    6. Do you believe in evolution? Why?

Questions for prosecution:

Michael Denton (Sam Liu)

    1. Did other scientist accept the theories you found that disprove Darwin?
    2. What theories did you find that supports evolution?
    3. What evidence did you have to prove there is a designer?
    4. What facts did you find on your own that supports your view?

Phillip E. Johnson (Jaurel Julao)

    1. What is your career?
    2. How does that help you in your investigations?
    3. What prove did you have that adapting to an environment doesn't count as evolution?
    4. Is it possible to have missing fossils?
    5. How can you be so sure that evolution is not a progression?
    6. What real evidence do you have that proves evolution wrong?

Michael J. Behe (Denaida Houston)

    1. What evidence did you have that disproves evolution?
    2. What does Darwin's Black Box has to do with your point of view?
    3. More questions along the trial

Evidences:

Evidence 1: Evolution of horse-used in opening statement to show an example of evolution.

Evidence 2: Lucy-may not use for trial.

Evidence 3: Lamarck's theory-used to back up and show Lamarck's theory.

Evidence 4: Mendel's diagram-used to support Mendel's theory.

Evidence 5: Darwin's Finches-used to support Darwin's theory.

Evidence 6: Witness statement of Michael Denton-used to point out Denton's weaknesses during the trial.

Evidence 7: Witness statement of Phillip E. Johnson-used to point out Johnson's weaknesses during the trial.

Possible Objections:

Hearsay: use when witnesses repeat things they've heard.

Leading: use when lawyers ask questions that will give an expected response.

Improper/Argumentative: use when the question insults, degrades, or embarrasses the witness.

Closing Statement:

Overall, evolution is still a mystery. In order to prove something wrong, you need evidence to support it. If there are no facts to disprove it, then it can't be wrong. Evolution is a thing that we will have to investigate more on. Darwin found his theories of evolution by investigating, so can other people. With more investigations, I'm sure more theories and evidences of evolution will come up that prove evolution true. Evolution is taught in schools to explain where we came from. Since education accepts it, why can't we accept it? Without any other facts that disprove evolution, the evolution theory will one day get accepted and proven true.

Brag Sheet:

I am the defense lawyer. I helped my group member out and told them what they have to do for that day. When agroup member missed a class, I let them know what they have to do.. I also worked with the other lawyers in getting information and clarifying things. Although I encouraged them to do work, some of my group member chose not to do work so I will consider counting them out for the trial.

Kenny Khounpangna

Charles Darwin

My name is Charles Darwin and I created and support the theory of evolution. I was born in 1804 and died in 1882. I went to Edinburgh University to study medicine, after I got my degree, I moved on to Cambridge University to become a clergy. I bad accepted a job with the HMS beagle, becoming a naturalist in the group.

From my studies on all exploring around the world I have come up with my own theory, the theory of evolution. My personal theories are that of natural selection and random mutation. Natural selection is when species are "selected" to survive in the world. Animals have and needs specific characteristics to live in the world. This leads to random mutation, when species change to adapt to their environments. That gives us the idea of why animals from same families have different characteristics. I have studied and explored more than enough to prove that my theories are somewhat true.

My theories don't come from no where, I have explored and studied with the ISIS beagle to find these theories. For example, in one of my adventures in Argentina, I found a variety of ostriches. In Argentina the ostriches were much larger, but in Patagonia much smaller ones replaced the giant ostriches. The change must have been because it had to survive by eating food, longer necks had to eat food from higher grounds, smaller ostriches had to eat from the lower grounds. This gave me a thought on why the sizes were different in different environments.

I also made a lot of exploring in the Galapagos Islands. I found that the birds and tortoises resemble the birds and tortoises in another nearby island even though they were not in the same family/population. They might have had the same characteristics so that they can survive together. This gave me ideas of natural selections (how they survive), and random mutation (how they adapt to their environment to do so).

All my hard work always comes with some missing information. I need more scientific proof to back up my theories. It goes against how life was created. I still have to prove that if the species are really mutations or not a new species. The zebra and the horse bred into a donkey is a strange problem that is hard to figure out about evolution. If I was still alive I could expand my mine to back up my theories.

In conclusion I believe strongly that my theory is correct. It's logical, and I believe that evolution is true. The species has to survive somehow, might as well adapt to their environment any way possible. If they didn't we would have extinct species, like the dinosaurs. Most people would believe that dinosaurs never existed, and that they weren't related to birds. How did we evolve from Ow prime ape then? How can you explain the fossil structures? Finish.

Kyaira Johnson

Lawyer's Brief: Prosecution

Opening Statement:

Their is not a such thing called evolution because, look here at this macrauchenia. Darwin said that the macrauchenia is the ancestor of a Guanaco. As you can see the Guanaco does not have a trunk like the Marcauchenia. Also the marcauchenia does not have a tail like the guanaco. Now I ask what happened in that gap. How did the tail get their. Think on that and tell me if you believe in evolution.

Strategies for trial:

For Defense:

    1. See how ready the defense is and look at how they respond to their lawyers questions.
    2. If they seem like they doubt what they are saying use that against them by asking the
    3. same question again and see if they can clarify it.
    4. Ask questions that make them doubt what they are saying.
    5. Try to trick them by making them say I think or maybe or things like that because then
    6. they don't have any real facts or evidence.
    7. Make them seem unprepared and make the jury doubt their evidence and their case.

For Prosecution:

    1. Ask questions that you know your witness can answer.
    2. Make them answer the way you want them to.
    3. Rephrase the question if they get stuck.
    4. Don't ask questions that you think might hurt the case.
    5. Look confident and make sure that you know your stuff.
    6. Try to ask yes or no questions.
    7. Put your strong witnesses first and last and put your weaker one in the middle.
    8. Present strong evidence and don't make the jury doubt you but make them be on your side.

Question for Defense:

Charles Darwin (Sam Martinez):

    1. What are some of the schools that you attended?
    2. What did you study?
    3. Do you believe in Natural Selection? Why?
    4. Is evolution something that can be observed?
    5. Does evolution really exist? Why or why not?

Jean Baptiste Lamark (Crystal Astabie):

    1. What did you study?
    2. What is your theory of evolution?
    3. Do you believe in Natural selection? Why?

Donald C. Johnson (Omar Padilla):

    1. What do you do?
    2. What types of things have you studied?
    3. What does Lucy have to do with evolution?
    4. Do you believe in evolution? Why?

Gregor Mendel:

    1. Are you religious?
    2. Do you believe in evolution? Why?
    3. What did you study?
    4. When you studied peas what did you conclude about them and why?

Kenneth R. Miller (Sophia Chew):

    1. What did you study?
    2. Do you believe in evolution? Why?
    3. What do you do?
    4. What makes you so sure that evolution really exists?,,

Question for Prosecution:

Michael Denton (James Craver):

    1. What is your full name?
    2. What do you do?
    3. Do you believe in evolution? Why?

Colin Patterson (Wilbur Dotty):

    1. What is your full name?
    2. What is your profession and where do you work?
    3. How many years did you study evolution?
    4. What do you know about evolution?

Michael J. Behe (Wendy Lee):

    1. What is your full name?
    2. Do you believe in evolution? Why?
    3. Are you religious?
    4. What is your profession?
    5. Where do you live?

Philip E. Johnson (Nicholas Horn):

    1. What is your full name?
    2. What do you do for a living?
    3. Do you believe in evolution? Why?
    4. What evidence do you have that supports your answer?

Henry M. Morris (Wilson Chen):

    1. What is your full name?
    2. Do you believe in evolution? Why?
    3. Are you religious?

Closing Statement:

Now as you can see and as you heard that there are gaps in the path of evolution. From this you can gather that the gaps might be a result of the fact that there is no real proof. If there was then there wouldn't be any gaps. Now that you have heard what we have to say you be the judge. If you think about it I am sure that you can gather that evolution doesn't exist because there is no real proof.

 

Wendy Lee

Anti-Evolution: Michael J. Behe

Hello! My name is Michael J. Behe. I have a huge disagreement with the theory of evolution. From my deduction of Darwin's evolution was incapable of explaining details from his own knowledge of biochemistry. I ask other professors and they too thought the same way I did. They even encouraged me to think that my ideas were reasonable. Of course it is because I have proof that I am correct. They said my idea could be advocate and they agree there was consequential problem that shouldn't be ignored.

I am now a professor of Biochemistry at Lehigh University and am now living in Bethlehem, Jerusalem. I am a Roman Catholic and grew-tip believing that God created life. It all made sense to me, that's why I never thought that evolution is true. I was informed in my undergraduate years and graduate studies in biochemistry that all of these astonishingly complex systems that I was learning about were the result of Darwinian evolution came from. I had a thesis to complete, so I didn't think much about the evolution. In 1987, I read a book called "Evolution: A Theory in Crisis, By: Michael Denton." It surprised me because there were enormous, uninformed problems with the evolutionary theory. The theory had a good percentage of being wrong. It couldn't really describe how life came to be.

The variation exists within the genes of every species, which the simple results of random mutation and in a particular environment, same individuals of a species.

Overtime, change within the species leads to the replacement of old species, are less successful and they became extinct. There is no clear evidence from fossil and many other sources that the species how on earth have evolved, or designated from ancestral form that are now extinct. Evolution will not change in the genetic makeup of a population or species over time.

While I was reading "Evolution: A Theory in Crisis," I realize that nobody else knew about this problem and since then on I became intensively absorbed in it. Some time later the issue from the science magazine came. I encountered it and thought it was a chronicle but it wasn't. The issue talks about anti-evolution. I got really angry and decided to write a letter to the editor pointing out that they should address the genius problems involved and not just retire something. Phil Johnson saw my letter and wrote back to me. We began to respond to each other's ideas. Ever since then, I was invited to a conference that I had been involved in. That's how I got-to be involved into people that were interested in the same problem I am.

I think that if you have peers to back your ideas up and give you the strength to carry on your ideas. A mousetrap is a truly good example of why evolution is not possible. Imagine the structure of a mousetrap. Can it work without one simple part of it? No, it cannot work because it needs all of the parts to function. This example is connected with evolution because if a part of DNA is missing in an animal's blood, it will not function correctly and obviously will soon be extinct. The animal's DNA and body are too complicated for evolution to take a role in life. This world would be empty right now. Therefore, evolution is not possible.

Bibliography:

Access Research Networkhttp://www.am.grgfthe/behehome.htm Date: 6/7/98

Michael J. Behe, Ph.D. bt!p://www.lehigh.edu/-inbios/behe.html Date: 5/27/01

Michael J. Belie hqp://ourworld.compuserve.com/bomepgges/rossuk/Behe.htm Date: 8/01 /97

Michael Behe Links http://www.rae.orgibehelink.html Date: 4/28/97

Wilbur Doty

Dr. Colin Patterson

Hello my name is Dr. Colin Patterson. I am a paleontologist at the British Museum of natural history. I spent twenty years of my life studying evolution. Then I realized that out of all the years that I studied evolution, I still don't know anything about it. I used to go to meetings about evolution and have pride in myself because I knew that I knew more about evolution than anybody in the room. I am sixty five years and I don't have any proof of evolution. A couple of years ago in 1995 I gave a lecture in America on evolution. I asked all of the evolutionists in t he room if they could tell me anything about evolution, any one thing that is true. The only answer I got was complete silence. I went to another meeting and they gave me the same answer, except one person who said it ought not to be taught in high school. So besides that, evolution should not be taught in high school rooms full of evolution.

My reasoning for my non-evolution theory is based on the fossil records. Though not transitional fossils show that those were later relatives of living things today, none can be directly linked to each other. I will not say what I cannot prove. There are just to many gaps to prove that the species are relatives. Take the Archaeopteryx for example, they say that is an ancestor of all birds but is there proof that it's not a just another species of animal. There is not enough proof to link it to all other birds. Transitional fossils plug big gaps in the fossil records but there are still too many small gaps to prove that the theory of evolution is true.

 

Nick Horn

Philip E. Johnson

Report not typed.

Sophia Chew

Kenneth R. Miller

Hi! My name is Kenneth R. Miller. I believe in evolution. I got a Ph.D. from the university of Colorado in 1974. I'm also an professor of Biology. I work at the Department of Molecular Biology, Cell Biology, & Biochemistry. I am also a Biology professor in Brown University.

Evolution is true, it's not just an believe. There is science behind the word evolution. When you go to Museum, all the fossils used to existed hundreds of years ago on earth. There is evolution, earth is evolving, it doesn't look like the old species because it changes though time slowly. Life is changing little by little. You can't tell that they are the same until you compare it, don't just use a species that is a million years old and compare it with these day's specie. If you compare every five years you can tell that the species you are looking at are the same exact kind.

Everything evolve in Earth, humans, fish, tiger, snakes, and etc. You can't see it change but the fossils that we dug up are evidence that we are evolving. If you match the DNA it will show that the DNA pattern are very alike.

You don't have to stop believing in god just because you believe in evolution. God have gave us the blueprints to all these fossil. He made us so we can find out these stuff about evolution. If you look at the growing fossil records of human, you will know that it's not just apes, they are really evolving into human.

Samuel Martinez

Biography on Charles Darwin

On my essay, I will be talking about my life and about my theory of evolution. I believe that the earth was created by evolution and that everything else was too.

I was born in February 12,1809 to 1882 in Shrewsbury, Shropshire. I was the son of Robert Waring Darwin and my wife Susannah; and I am the grandson of the scientist Erasmus Darwin, and of the potter Josiah Wedgwood. My mother died when I was eight years old, and I was brought up by my sister. I was taught classics at Shrewsbury, then sent to Edinburgh to `study medicine, which I hated, and a final attempt at educating me was made by sending me to Christ's College, Cambridge, to study theology on 1827. During that period I loved to collect plants, insects, and geological specimens, guided by my cousin William Darwin Fox, an entomologist. My scientific inclinations were encouraged by my botany professor, John Stevens Henslow, who was instrumental, despite heavy paternal opposition, in securing a place for me as a naturalist on the surveying expedition of HMS Beagle to Patagonia during 1831-1836.

I also had many companions on my quests. One of them was Alfred Russel Wallace. We believed that animals evolve to fit the environment. We saw many animals that resembled each other, but that were different kinds. The evolved animal developed other features to fit in. Four main definitions of the theory of evolution that I had were 1): variation exists within the genes of every species, and the result of random mutation. 2): In a particular environment, some individuals of species are better suited for survival and so leave more offspring. 3): Over time, change within species leads to the replacement of old species by new species as less successful species become extinct. 4): there is clear evidence from fossils and many other sources that the species now on earth have evolved from ancestral forms that are extinct.

I did many research on my theory of evolution. For example, I went to Galapagos island to study organisms. I studied habitats from jungles, grasslands, mountains, and many other places. I also did a lot of outside research and wrote many observations on my research. Some of my results were, for example, my theory of evolutionary selection holds that variation within species occurs randomly and that the survival or extinction of each organism is determined by the organisms adoption to environment. Also, in the grasslands of Argentina there are no rabbits. However, there are rodents that resemble rabbits. These rodents are unrelated to European rabbits, but are similar to rodents from South America. I also postulated that long term environmental changes, including movement of long masses and changes in climate, could have served in the process of natural selection over many generations with the result that diverse species arose from ancestral types. I had many theories. For example, I think that evolution did occur. Also, that evolutionary change was gradual, requiring thousands of millions of years. The primary mechanism for evolution was a process called natural selection. The millions of species alive today arose from a single original life form through a branching process called specialization.

Under Captain Robert Fitzroy, I visited Tenerife, the Cape Verde Is, Brazil, Montevideo, Tierra del Fuego, Buenos Aires, Valparaiso, Chile, the Galapagos, Tahiti, New Zealand, and Tasmania. In the Keeling Is I devised a theory of coral reefs. During this five-year expedition I obtained intimate knowledge of the fauna, flora, and geology of many lands, which equipped me for my later investigations. By 1846 I had published several works on the geologcial and zoological discoveries of my voyage- works that paced me at once in the front rank of scientists. I developed a friendship with Sir Charles Lyell, became secretary of the Geological Society on 1838 to 1841, and in 1839 I married his cousin Emma Wedgewood on 1808.

From 1842 I lived at Down House, Downe, Kent, a country gentlemen among his gardens, conservatories, pigeons, and fowls. The practical knowledge that I gained there, especially in variation and interbreeding, proved invaluable. Private means enabled me to devote myself to science, in spite of continuous illhealth: it was not realized until after my death that I had suffered from Chagas's disease, which I had contracted from insect bite while in South America.

At Down House I addressed myself to the great work of my life- the problem of the origin of species. After five years of collecting the evidence, I began to speculate on the subject. In 1842 I drew up my observations in some short notes, expanded in 1844 into a sketch of conclusions for my own use. These embodied the principle of natural selection, the germ of the Darwinian Theory, but with typical caution I delayed publication of my hypothesis.

However, in 1858 Alfred Russel Wallace sent me a memoir of the Malay Archipelago, which, to my surprise, contained in essence the main ideas of my own theory of natural selection. Lyell and Joseph Hooker persuaded me to submit a paper of my own, based on my 1844 sketch, which was read simultaneously with Wallace's before the Linnean Society in 1858. Neither me nor Wallace was present on that historic occasion.

Then I set to work to condense a vast mass of notes, and put into shape my great work, The Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, published in 1859. This epoch-making work, received througout Europe with the deepest interest, was violently attacked because it did not agree with the account of creation given in the Book of Genesis. But eventually it succeeded in obtaining recognition from almost all biologists.

I continued to work at a series of supplemental treatises: The Fertilization of Orchids (1862), The Variation of Plants and Animals under Domestication (1867), and The Descent of Man and Selection in Relation to Sex (1871), which postulated that the human race derived from a hairy animal belonging to the great anthropoid group, and was related to the progenitors of the orang-utan, chimpanzee, and gorilla. In my 1871 work I also developed an important supplementary theory of sexual selection.

Later works include The Expression of Emotions in Man and Animals (1872), Insectivorous Plants (1875), The Effects of Cross and Self Fertilization in the Vegetable Kingdom (1876), Different Forms of Flowers in Plants of the Same Species (1877), and The Formations of Vegetable Mould through the Action of Worms (1881).

For most of my life, I've taken an interest in evolution. Trying to find out if evolution is true. Traveling around the world studying plants, animals, and habitats I believe that it is. Coming up with four theories, working with many naturalists such as Lamarck, Wallace, and Malthus from all around the world, coming up with the process of natural selection and coming up with a presentable and reasonable hypothesis explaining how evolution takes place I feel very strong that evolution does occur. With my clear facts, knowledge, and many observations I hope people will understand and come into mind that evolution does occur.

Christopher Fernandez

Lawyer's Brief: Defense

Opening Statement:

Evolution is a true theory that we humans made that explains why other older creatures changed. Without evolution how would we humans become alive? Without evolution life in earth would not be here. Without evolution how can we explain how this animal became that? Evolution is a theory that shows and explains how animals change and without this we wouldn't have a way to answer how this animal changed into this. Proof for evolution is hard to find and people say that without enough proof to show that evolution is right we won't be able to say evolution is true. Well, Like a puzzle we can find some missing pieces and fit the pieces together but like a puzzle pieces are also lost. Trust me all the puzzles I had at least all of them had lost a piece of the puzzle. With those pieces we put together we were able to see a bigger picture and with small amounts of missing pieces we still can see the bigger picture without the missing pieces. The puzzle can't be whole until all the pieces are put to place but with some missing pieces we still can see the whole picture.

Strategies for Trial:

For Defense:

    1. Ask the questions they can answer the best way they can.
    2. Try not to confuse your witnesses.
    3. Try not asking questions which will hurt our side.
    4. Try to keep going in the direction you are trying to go.
    5. Try to keep your witness calm and feel confident.
    6. Try giving nice and simple questions which has a strong point.
    7. Strong witness go last, second strongest witness goes first, the week witnesses go in the middle.
    8. Try to give your witnesses a great question which they can actually can answer.
    9. Try to convince the jury on our side.

For Prosecution:

    1. See how the prosecution handles their witnesses.
    2. Try looking at the witnesses and check if they have any doubts.
    3. Try making them doubt their reasons.
    4. Try making them say their own opinions like assume, guess, and think.
    5. Try to make them look dumb.
    6. Make the jury think their evidence is fake and is not true.

Questions for Prosecution:

Philip E. Johnson (Nick Horn):

    1. Please state your name to the court.
    2. Do you belive in evolution?
    3. You made a book called Darwin on Trial right?
    4. Can you please explain some evidences that you found to help you disagree with Darwin's Theory of evolution?
    5. You also made a book called Defeating Darwinisms by Opening Minds Right?
    6. Please explain what that book teaches us about how to defeat Darwinism.
    7. Do you have any other evidence that evolution is not true?

Colin Patterson (Wilbur Doty):

    1. Please state your name to the court.
    2. Do you belive in evolution?
    3. What kind of evidence do you have to support yourself that evolution is not true?

Michael Denton (James Craver):

    1. Please state your name to the court.
    2. Do you believe in evolution?
    3. You made a book called Evolution a Theory in Crisis. Can you explain what you said in your book about evolution?
    4. Can you tell us any other information that you found that can show us that evolution is false?
    5. Why do you think evolution is false?

Michael J. Behe (Wendy Lee):

    1. Please state your name to the court.
    2. Do you believe in evolution?
    3. Please explain what evidence you have that makes evolution fake?
    4. You also made a book called Darwin's Black Bq~k, Can you explain what you said that gives evidence that evolution is not true.
    5. What other information or proof do you have to say evolution is fake?

Henry M. Morris (Wilson Chen):

    1. Please state your name to the court.
    2. Do you believe in evolution?
    3. What do you do for a living?
    4. What makes you so sure that evolution is not true?
    5. What religion are you?
    6. Does that affect your views on evolution?
    7. In your book Scientific Creation you strongly disagree with evolution. Can you explain what evidence you have to disagree with evolution.
    8. Can you explain how your background knowledge of Hydraulic Engineering, Geology and Mathematics can explain that evolution is wrong?

Questions for Defense:

Charles Darwin (Sam Martinez):

    1. Please state your name to the court.
    2. What theories did you have about evolution?
    3. Can you explain your evolution theory.
    4. What kind of research did you do?
    5. What were the results of your research?
    6. What reasons do you have for believing that evolution theory is correct?

Jean Baptiste Lamark (Crystal Astabie):

    1. Please state your name for the court.
    2. When were you bom and are you dead?
    3. What biological discoveries have you made?
    4. Do you believe in the theory of evolution?
    5. What evidence do you have to support it?
    6. Why do you believe in the theory df evolution?
    7. What have you done to publicize your research?`~
    8. What other biologists have you worked with?

Donald C. Johanson (Omar Padilla):

    1. Please state your name for the court.
    2. Do you believe in evolution?
    3. What kind of theories did you have about evolution?
    4. What kind of education did you have?
    5. What is the best discovery you ever made?
    6. What is lucy?
    7. Can you explain how lucy can give evidence that evolution is true?

Kenneth R. Miller (Sophia Chew):

    1. Please state your name for the court.
    2. Do you believe in evolution?
    3. Why do you believe in evolution?
    4. Why are you so sure about evolution?
    5. What do you know about evolution?
    6. Do you have any evidence for evolution?

Conclusion Statement:

As you can see we found evidence for some parts of the evolution puzzle. This evidence is enough for us to see the whole big picture of the puzzle even though we are missing some parts to it. The important part is that the theory is true and that if we find enough proof we don't have to finish the puzzle because we would be able to see the whole picture. Even though we can't find all the missing pieces we can still see it. What I saw when I put all the pieces we had together I saw this big picture of something nice and something beautiful. That picture that I saw from the evolution puzzle made the picture of LIFE.

Brag Sheet:

I am the Defense lawyer! Doing the brief!! Also got to do the trial. I'm working so hard in this case!

Witness set up:

    1. Charles Darwin
    2. Kenneth R. Miller
    3. Donald C. Johanson
    4. Jean Baptiste Lamark

Evidence:

    1. Figure 12-3 movement and growing of necks for giraffes (Lamarck Found this info and is good to ask him about this gradual change of the necks)
    2. Gradualism/ Punctured Equilibruim (Shows gradual changes from species to speices)
    3. Ancestor of South America Animals (Shows information about Darwins evidence- good for asking about it to Darwin)
    4. The Lucy Fossil (shows lucy and also shows that bones can be lost and broken. Also good to show to jury when talking to Donald)
    5. The fossils of the evolution of the horses teeth (shows gradual changes)
    6. Shows finches record (Good for Darwin's interview)
    7. Shows the fossil of heads (Shows gradual changes)
    8. The Diorama of Green River (shows an example where an organism can become a fossil)
    9. Dog to whale (shows how a dog become a whale) (Also shows that some missing fossils are not found to show that this change was gradual.)

Sophia Chew

Kenneth R. Miller

Hi! My name is Kenneth R. Miller. I believe in evolution. I got a Ph.D. from the university of Colorado in 1974. I'm also an professor of Biology. I work at the Department of Molecular Biology, Cell Biology, & Biochemistry. I am also a Biology professor in Brown University.

Evolution is true, it's not just an believe. There is science behind the word evolution. When you go to Museum, all the fossils used to existed hundreds of years ago on earth. There is evolution, earth is evolving, it doesn't look like the old species because it changes though time slowly. Life is changing little by little. You can't tell that they are the same until you compare it, don't just use a species that is a million years old and compare it with these day's specie. If you compare every five years you can tell that the species you are looking at are the same exact kind.

Everything evolve in Earth, humans, fish, tiger, snakes, and etc. You can't see it change but the fossils that we dug up are evidence that we are evolving. If you match the DNA it will show that the DNA pattern are very alike.

You don't have to stop believing in god just because you believe in evolution. God have gave us the blueprints to all these fossil. He made us so we can find out these stuff about evolution. If you look at the growing fossil records of human, you will know that it's not just apes, they are really evolving into human.

Samuel Martinez

Biography on Charles Darwin

On my essay, I will be talking about my life and about my theory of evolution. I believe that the earth was created by evolution and that everything else was too.

I was born in February 12,1809 to 1882 in Shrewsbury, Shropshire. I was the son of Robert Waring Darwin and my wife Susannah; and I am the grandson of the scientist Erasmus Darwin, and of the potter Josiah Wedgwood. My mother died when I was eight years old, and I was brought up by my sister. I was taught classics at Shrewsbury, then sent to Edinburgh to study medicine, which I hated, and a final attempt at educating me was made by sending me to Christ's College, Cambridge, to study theology on 1827. During that period I loved to collect plants, insects, and geological specimens, guided by my cousin William Darwin Fox, an entomologist. My scientific inclinations were encouraged by my botany professor, John Stevens Henslow, who was instrumental, despite heavy paternal opposition, in securing a place for me as a naturalist on the surveying expedition of HMS Beagle to Patagonia during 1831-1836.

I also had many companions on my quests. One of them was Alfred Russel Wallace. We believed that animals evolve to fit the environment. We saw many animals that resembled each other, but that were different kinds. The evolved animal developed other features to fit in. Four main definitions of the theory of evolution that I had were 1): variation exists within the genes of every species, and the result of random mutation. 2): In a particular environment, some individuals of species are better suited for survival and so leave more offspring. 3): Over time, change within species leads to the replacement of old species by new species as less successful species become extinct. 4): there is clear evidence from fossils and many other sources that the species now on earth have evolved from ancestral forms that are extinct.

I did many research on my theory of evolution. For example, I went to Galapagos island to study organisms. I studied habitats from jungles, grasslands, mountains, and many other places. I also did a lot of outside research and wrote many observations on my research. Some of my results were, for example, my theory of evolutionary selection holds that variation within species occurs randomly and that the survival or extinction of each organism is determined by the organisms adoption to environment. Also, in the grasslands of Argentina there are no rabbits. However, there are rodents that resemble rabbits. These rodents are unrelated to European rabbits, but are similar to rodents from South America. I also postulated that long term environmental changes, including movement of long masses and changes in climate, could have served in the process of natural selection over many generations with the result that diverse species arose from ancestral types. I had many animals that resembled each other, but that were different kinds. The evolved animal developed other features to fit in. Four main definitions of the theory of evolution that I had were 1): variation exists within the genes of every species, and the result of random mutation. 2): In a particular environment, some individuals of species are better suited for survival and so leave more offspring. 3): Over time, change within species leads to the replacement of old species by new species as less successful species become extinct. 4): there is clear evidence from fossils and many other sources that the species now on earth have evolved from ancestral forms that are extinct.

I did many research on my theory of evolution. For example, I went to Galapagos island to study organisms. I studied habitats from jungles, grasslands, mountains, and many other places. I also did a lot of outside research and wrote many observations on my research. Some of my results were, for example, my theory of evolutionary selection holds that variation within species occurs randomly and that the survival or extinction of each organism is determined by the organisms adoption to environment. Also, in the grasslands of Argentina there are no rabbits. However, there are rodents that resemble rabbits. These rodents are unrelated to European rabbits, but are similar to rodents from South America. I also postulated that long term environmental changes, including movement of long masses and changes in climate, could have served in the process of natural selection over many generations with the result that diverse species arose from ancestral types. I had many theories. For example, I think that evolution did occur. Also, that evolutionary change was gradual, requiring thousands of millions of years. The primary mechanism for evolution was a process called natural selection. The millions of species alive today arose from a single original life form through a branching process called specialization.

Under Captain Robert Fitzroy, I visited Tenerife, the Cape Verde Is, Brazil, Montevideo, Tierra del Fuego, Buenos Aires, Valparaiso, Chile, the Galapagos, Tahiti, New Zealand, and Tasmania. In the Keeling Is I devised a theory of coral reefs. During this five-year expedition I obtained intimate knowledge of the fauna, flora, and geology of many lands, which equipped me for my later investigations. By 1846 I had published several works on the geologcial and zoological discoveries of my voyage- works that paced me at once in the front rank of scientists. I developed a friendship with Sir Charles Lyell, became secretary of the Geological Society on 1838 to 1841, and in 1839 I married his cousin Emma Wedgewood on 1808.

From 1842 I lived at Down House, Downe, Kent, a country gentlemen among his gardens, conservatories, pigeons, and fowls. The practical knowledge that I gained there, especially in variation and interbreeding, proved invaluable. Private means enabled me to devote myself to science, in spite of continuous illhealth: it was not realized until after my death that I had suffered from Chagas's disease, which I had contracted from insect bite while in South America.

At Down House I addressed myself to the great work of my life- the problem of the origin of species. After five years of collecting the evidence, I began to speculate on the subject. In 1842 I drew up my observations in some short notes, expanded in 1844 into a sketch of conclusions for my own use. These. embodied the principle of natural selection, the germ of the Darwinian Theory, but with typical caution I delayed publication of my hypothesis.

However, in 1858 Alfred Russel Wallace sent me a memoir of the Malay Archipelago, which, to my surprise, contained in essence the main ideas of my own theory of natural selection. Lyell and Joseph Hooker persuaded me to submit a paper of my own, based on my 1844 sketch, which was read simultaneously with Wallace's before the Linnean Society in 1858. Neither me nor Wallace was present on that historic occasion.

Then I set to work to condense a vast mass of notes, and put into shape my great work, The Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, published in 1859. This epoch-making work, received througout Europe with the deepest interest, was violently attacked because it did not agree with the account of creation given in the Book of Genesis. But eventually it succeeded in obtaining recognition from almost all biologists.

I continued to work at a series of supplemental treatises: The Fertilization of Orchids (1862), The Variation of Plants and Animals under Domestication (1867), and The Descent of Man and Selection in Relation to Sex (1871), which postulated that the human race derived from a hairy animal belonging to the great anthropoid group, and was related to the progenitors of the orang-utan, chimpanzee, and gorilla. In my 1871 work I also developed an important supplementary theory of sexual selection.

Later works include The Expression of Emotions in Man and Animals (1872), Insectivorous Plants (1875), The Effects of Cross and Self Fertilization in the Vegetable Kingdom (1876), Different Forms of Flowers in Plants of the Same Species (1877), and The Formations of Vegetable Mould through the Action of Worms (1881).

For most of my life, I've taken an interest in evolution. Trying to find out if evolution is true. Traveling around the world studying plants, animals, and habitats I believe that it is. Coming up with four theories, working with many naturalists such as Lamarck, Wallace, and Malthus from all around the world, coming up with the process of natural selection and coming up with a presentable and reasonable hypothesis explaining how evolution takes place I feel very strong that evolution does occur. With my clear facts, knowledge, and many observations I hope people will understand and come into mind that evolution does occur.

Jasmine Yuan

Lawyer's Brief (Prosecution side: Anti-evolutionist)

Opening Statement:

Evolution is still a mystery to many and it should be. Evolution is only a theory without solid evidence. Evidences may be found and use to prove the existence of evolution, but there are too many flaws. Missing links have been found in the so-called "evolution" of the dolphins and some fossils were found to be fake. The evolution theory has clearly made an assumption that human evolved from the apes, but why do the other apes exist today unable to talk like human? Without enough evidence, we cannot make any assumption that this evolution theory is true.

Strategies for trial:

For defense:

    1. l.Pay attention to the lawyer's questions and how they ask the questions.
    2. 2.Also pay attention to the witnesses" answers, especially the way they answer the questions. Listen if the witnesses know their information and how sure they are on the topic. Here I can use non-responsive method to make the witness confuse.
    3. 3.Asking questions that they don't know a sure answer.
    4. 4.Ask leading questions that would cause them to question their own answers. When they question their answers they would answer with doubt causing the jury to also doubt their evidences.
    5. 5.Make the lawyer and the witnesses seem unprepared and that would cause the jury to question the evidences and the case.

For Prosecution:

    1. Ask questions that the witnesses know for sure and have no doubts about them.
    2. Ask questions that would lead the witnesses to answer the way I want them to answer.
    3. Ask the questions in another way to help the witnesses to understand the question better.
    4. Never ask questions that the witnesses are not sure of or asking questions that create a doubt to the jury.
    5. Ask yes no questions that would answer a lot and giving strong evidence.
    6. Make sure I know all my materials and I am prepared.
    7. Look and feel confident, stay calm at all time and don't create an image to the jury that I doubt my side.
    8. Make the jury to be on my side instead of doubting my case.

Questions for prosecution:

Philip E. Johnson (Kenny Li):

    1. What is your full name?
    2. What education did you receive?
    3. Is it true that you don't believe in evolution?
    4. Explain why you don't believe in this theory.
    5. Where did the origin of life come from?

Henry M. Morris (Emily Wong):

    1. Please state you full name.
    2. What is your education background?
    3. Do you believe in evolution?
    4. What procedure did you do to prove that evolution is false?
    5. Michael Behe (Amalia Arellano)

    6. Please state you full name.
    7. What is your education background?
    8. Do you believe in evolution?
    9. How did you do to prove that evolution is false?

Questions for defense:

Charles Darwin (Steven Sanouvong):

    1. What is your name?
    2. What education did you receive?
    3. What were grades you received during your years of school?
    4. According to you, you have found fossils on the Galapagos Island that proved evolution. In all the fossils you have found, are you able complete a flawless picture of evolution?
    5. Can you show us that you have found and created a flawless completed picture of evolution?

Donald Johanson (Willy Chen):

    1. What education did you receive?
    2. According to you, did Lucy evolve from the apes and then evolved to human?
    3. What research have you done to prove this assumption you've made about Lucy?
    4. Can you show us prove that Lucy evolved from apes and evolved to human?
    5. Can you explain how Lucy's hip and jaw changed from the apes and then changed into the hips and jaws of human today?

Closing Statement:

As you can see, evolution is only a believe of scientists. There are not enough evidences to prove this theory. Mr. Darwin may have found fossils that have existed a long time ago, but there were not any prove to show that evolution happened. Mr. Johanson may have found the fossil of Lucy, but there no evidences that Lucy evolved from apes and evolved to human. So, with all the missing links and the lack of evidences, is evolution a fact or is it just a believe?

Brag Sheet:

In this project, I didn't do much extra. I basically just use my time and did my own job. I was the prosecution lawyer. I did my job and kept the people in my group on tasks and helped them to get information if they could fin any. I told them to move on to the next question on the checklist if they were stuck on one. I reminded them to double space and to write the statement.

Emily Wong

Henry M. Morris

For a while people have been debating whether evolution is the explanation for our universe's and our existence. I am one of them. My name is Henry M Morris, and I was born in 1918. 1 strongly believe that the Theory of Evolution is not true. I earned Ph.D. Hydraulic Engineering with Minor in Geology and Mathematics from the University of Minnesota. My professions were Assistant Hydraulic Engineer, International Boundary and Water Commission, El Paso, Texas (1939-1942), Instructor in Civil Engineering, Rice University (1942-1946), Instructor and Assistant Professor in Civil Engineering and Research Project Leader - St. Anthony Falls Hydraulic Laboratory, University of Minnesota (1946-1951), Professor and Head - Department of Civil Engineering, University of Louisiana at Lafayette Acting Dean of Engineering, Fall (1951-56), Professor of Applied Science - Southern Illinois University (1956-1957), and Professor of Hydraulic Engineering and Chairman - Department of Civil Engineering, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University (1957-1970). I've written a book called Scientific Creation that argues against evolution. I am now retired. I fight against the Theory of Evolution using my knowledge of Hydraulic Engineering, Geology and Mathematics.

The Theory of Evolution states that in every species, there is a will be a different gene that is caused by our random changing, that natural selection plays a part in getting rid of the weaker species who can not take care of themselves, that fossils, will show you the earlier forms of life, from which the species now on earth have evolved from, and that natural selection will one day, wipe out all the weak species and replace it with newer, stronger ones.

I've used the Law of Increasing Entropy to prove that the Theory of Evolution is not true. The law of Increasing Entropy states that everything in the world is getting worse and that this world is going towards chaos. Natural selection from the Theory of Evolution contradicts this. It says that the best species will survive, making the world a better place. This cannot be. Our world right now is only getting worse; we are losing more life each and everyday. While I can use nature's laws to help me prove evolution wrong, I also use my religion to prove it wrong.

In conclusion, I am one of the many people opposing evolution. I've studied hydrology in college and went on after that to write a book, stating some convincing arguments. My arguments state that the Law of Increasing Entropy contradicts natural selection, part of the Theory of Evolution. I believe that God created the universe and that we did not evolve from a lower being. I don't believe that our world is getting stronger and better just as natural selection says, but our world is deteriorating, heading for chaos.

Bibliography

Morris Henry M., "Henry M. Morris, Ph.D. Hydraulic Engineering with Minor in Geology and Mathematics (Retired)", 1984, http://www.icr.org/creationscientists/hmorris.html

Morris, Henry M., "Evolution, Thermodynamics, and Entropy", 1973, http://www.icr.org/pubs/imp/imp-003.htm

Kenny Li

Philip E Johnson

My name is Philip E Johnson. After all the gaps in the fossil record I can't believe that the have proven the theory of evolution is true. I was born in Cleveland Ohio 1906. Right now I am a professor of law in the university of California in Berkeley. I got my B.A. from Harvard. I got my J.D from the university of Chicago.

I do not believe in the evolution theory. For me I think everything is different. There is a difference between every animal in this planet. I don't believe that dinosaurs evolve into mammals and then evolve into birds. All the fossils records there are no link that links them together. There is no strong evidence to prove that the evolution theory is right. i can't believe that they approved the evolution theory right when there are gaps in the fossil record and there is no strong evidence that we evolved from apes. The biggest gap in the fossil record that proves evolution theory is wrong. This is the major division of animal life. In the rocks of the Cambrian era 550 mya. The Cambrian explosion is one of the great mysteries in the history of life. Richard Dawkins, the complete Darwinist propagandist, says that the phyla are just there and seems like no history at all. But the fossils representing the phyla all lies on a parallel line. These lines, however, are connected by lines with no fossil of their own. There is no evidence from the fossils of a pattern of common ancestors and intermediates connecting them. If it is like what Darwin said that there should be a connection between them but where is it. There is no connection between each fossils found there. We also found different human like fossils and also there is no link between each of them. If mutation happens to every animal in earth and if we really evolved from apes then how come other apes and moneys also evolve like us and talk like us. How did one simple cell or bacterium from the beginning of life evolve into all these other different species that live in earth? There is no clear evidence that fish evolve into mammals and mammals can evolve into fishes. There is no way that nature itself can produce all these species. Where did nature get the power to start life in the beginning? There has to be some kind of power to help nature to start life. Nature can't do all these things by itself. I think that there are many species of animals in earth because of super natural powers like God

After all the research I have done. I found that there is no way that nature itself can do all these mutation and evolution itself. All these things can be explain by god. When 1 read the book from Darwin and other scientist that believe the evolution of theory. 1 found that no one could explain where did the first life come from. Is it nature make it, can nature possibly do it all alone or god make it. 1 think the answer is god is the one that created life in this planet and god is the one that created us and other animals the way it is.

There is a lot of weakness in Philip E Johnson work. First he is really religious and think god is the only one who can really create life and god is the one that created life in this planet. He did not do any outside research. The kind of research he does is armchair research, which is getting all the information from books. This is a very weak point because he only does arm chair research. If he did not go out and do all these research and only see things in his own perspective and see things in a religious way. The evidence that needed to strengthen his arguments is doing some outside research and tries to see things outside of religious. He should try to see things in another person's perspective. This way he could get more information and also strengthen his argument more.

In conclusion, Philip E Johnson does not believe in the theory of evolution. He is a very religious person and sees things in a religious way. He only does arm chair research. He doesn't have any outside research experience. He believe that God is the one that created life in this planet and don't try to see the world and theory of evolution in a scientific way.

Reference:

http://www.arn.org/docs/orpages/or161/151main.htm

Defeating Darwinism (by Philip E Johnson)

http://www.arn.org.infopage/johnson.htm

http://www.origins.org/pjohnson/defeating.html

Sa, Kenny

Lawyer's Brief: Defense Side: Evolutionist

Opening Statement:

Evolution is a theory which is most agreed on by scientists. With the many facts and evidence we have found throughout the years, we have been able to piece together the history of life and connect it to our own production. In addition to the recent discoveries in the human genome map, which connects our own life to other species, variation of DNA is now widely considered when proving that evolution is true. Currently with all the breakthroughs in science, evolution is now a term, which is considered by the whole world, and is brought into the educational systems curriculum in order to enlighten the world that evolution, brought about our existence.

Strategies for trial:

For Defense:

    1. Ask questions that your witnesses can answer and thoroughly explain.
    2. Get your witnesses to answer confidently and fill in details, which just corresponds to the answer to what you want, so that the opposition cannot use it against them.
    3. Rephrase the questions so they don't sound complicated.
    4. You have to look confident when presenting your case.
    5. Remember to use simple questions.
    6. Don't use words that are too advanced for your witnesses, that your jury won't be able to understand you.
    7. You have to be able to use the evidence to help your witnesses and make sure it connects.
    8. Don't pressure your witness, or he/she won't do so well.
    9. Do not include any information that would doubt your case.
    10. Practice beforehand, so you can make sure that they know their information and that what they say would be suitable for the case.
    11. Also, be prepared to object to things that would help the witnesses.

For Prosecution:

    1. Use words, which the witnesses may not be able to understand that, will correspond to there subject to test if they know their material well enough.
    2. Make sure to study your knowledge well on each witness, so that you can carefully examine any mistakes they make.
    3. Try to target them, so that they do not fully understand their material.
    4. Target their weaknesses, and observe their words carefully.
    5. Try to get the jury on your side, as you force the witnesses into a nervous state, which will eventually break them down.
    6. Make eye contact with the witnesses to intimidate them
    7. Knowledge is what's going to help you win in this battle. Come prepared knowing what you can about evolution.
    8. Be sure to also ask questions to clarify things that they themselves may not even understand about the subject.

Questions for Defense:

Donald C. Johnson (Wiley Chen)

    1. What did you learn in the course of your studies?
    2. Do you believe in Evolution?
    3. What major discovery brought about your career?
    4. What were the special characteristics of Lucy?
    5. What is the other findings did you accumulate after the Lucy fossil?

Charles Darwin (Steven Sanouvong)

    1. What was your area of study during your time in school?
    2. What is your current occupation?
    3. Do you believe in Evolution?
    4. Explain your four theories on evolution.
    5. How did you come across this information?=.`
    6. What is natural selection?
    7. What is random mutation?

Gregor Mendel Did not turn into Witness Statement)

    1. What is your occupation?
    2. What is your theory on evolution or genetics?
    3. How did you come across this information?
    4. Does your research in genetics correspond to our own molecular structure?

Kenneth R Miller (Marquez Harris) Did not turn in a Witness Statement)

    1. What's your profession?
    2. What facts do you have concerning evolution?
    3. Do you believe in evolution?

Questions for Prosecution:

Henry M. Morris (Emily Wong)

    1. If you are not a scientist of evolution, what are you?
    2. Do you have any primary sources pertaining to God as creator opposed to evolution?
    3. What is the law of increasing entropy?
    4. (Follow up question if suits my needs) How does it relate to evolution seeing that at this point our society is technologically growing advanced?

Philip E. Johnson (Wiley Chen)

    1. What is your occupation?
    2. Does it have any relevance to evolution?
    3. How did you attain your facts to disproving evolution?
    4. How can you be sure that the process of evolution does not take place?
    5. Do you have any real evidence to disproving evolution?

Michael Denton (Did not turn in Witness Statement)

    1. What is your occupation?
    2. What information do you have disproves Darwin? l
    3. Do you have any evidence that supports your view?

Michael Behe (Amalia Arellano) (Did not turn in Witness Statement) ,

    1. What information do you have that disproves evolution?
    2. Do you have any facts supporting this?
    3. What is Intelligent Design? - -

Objections:

Types used:

Asked and Answered — Questions asked and answered.

Hearsay — Using facts from things heard to prove a case.

Irrelevant/Immaterial — Arguments that have no real importance regarding the case.

Leading — Questions that answer themselves.

Multiple (Compound or Ambiguous) — Asking more than one question at a time.

Non-Responsive — Not actually answering the question, may be stalling.

Improper/Argumentative — Questions that insult or embarrass the witness.

Speculative — Information that requires witness to guess.

List of Evidence Collected

    1. Figure 12-3
    2. Ancestors of South American Animals
    3. Lucy Fossil
    4. Major Events in History of Life on earth
    5. Evolution of the Horse
    6. Gradualism/Punctured Equilibrium
    7. Gallery of Plio-Pleistocene Hominids
    8. Green River Formation Diorama
    9. Fossil Record of Hominids
    10. Finch Record

Using Evidence for Trials

For evidence 3, I will use the picture of the Lucy Fossil to help support my witness, Donald Johanson as he explains the similarities between us, and the fossil that used to be a being. I will also use the fossil record of hominid to help support his other facts, which will relate to his findings after Lucy. As for Charles Darwin I will let him use the finch record to explain how he found his facts. As for the Green River Formation diorama, it will be a counter on how fossils are destroyed or how they're hard to create.

Closing Statement:

Evolution is a theory, which is supported by much evidence that we have gained throughout the years. There is much opposition from people to whether evolution is true, and without facts to justify that evolution is not a proven fact, then it can't be truly false. You need evidence to prove something is false as well as proving something is true, and without evidence, I see no reason as to why evolution would not be true. With the recent growing human population, many schools I have stated have a big influence from the teachings of evolution. This is still a controversial issue, and may be for some time, but since we are discovering more things as the years go by, evolution may one day be accepted by the whole human species.

Brag Sheet:

For this trial, I was a defense lawyer. I cooperate with the other lawyers in planning the trials, and gave information, which helped them in their research. I was in charge of Steven Sanouvang, Willy Chen, Marquez Harris, and Krystel Perry. I encouraged them to do their work to the best of my ability, and help them do their work. Only two to three fourths succeeded, and I will have to greatly consider whether to use some of them in the trials or not.

Steven Sanouvong

Charles Darwin

My name is Charles Darwin and I'm naturalist who believe in the theory of evolution. I was born in Shrewsbury, Shropshire on February 12, 1809. I am is a British naturalist who became famous for the theories of evolution and natural selection. I believed all the life on earth evolved (developed gradually) over millions of years from a few common ancestors. I traveled all around the world to study plants and animals and what kind of habitat they lived in. I wrote many books that explains my theories on evolution like, "On the Origin of the Species by Means of Natural Selection, the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life" (1859) or "The Origin of the Species" for short. After publication of Origin of Species, I continued to write on botany, geology, and zoology until my death in 1882. I was buried in Westminster Abbey.

In 1831 to 1836 I served as naturalist aboard the H.M.S. Beagle on a British science expedition around the world. In South America I found fossils of extinct animals that were similar to modern species. On the Galapagos Islands in the Pacific Ocean I noticed many variations among plants and animals of the same general type as those in South America. The expedition visited places around the world, and I studied plants and animals everywhere I went, collecting specimens for further study.

After many notes, observations, and specimens I collected I was able to come up with four theories. 1) Variations exists within the genes of every species (the result of random mutation). 2) In a particular environment, some individuals of a species are better suited for survival and so leave more offspring (natural selection). 3) Over time, change within species leads to the replacement of old species by new species as less successful species become extinct. 4) There is clear evidence from fossils and many other sources that the species now on Earth have evolved (descended) from ancestral forms that are extinct (evolution).

I had a view that each species was a divine creation, unchanging and existing as it was originally created. But scientists begun to see that this could not explain the kinds and distribution of fossils they have found. In 1809, a French scientist Jean Baptiste Lamarck proposed a mechanism to explain how evolution occurs. Lamarck believed evolution occurs as structures develop through use, or disappear because of disuse, and as these "acquired characteristics" are passed to offsprings.

My idea on evolution weakened when he went to South America. I found fossils of extinct armadillos. I noticed that the armadillos didn't resemble the armadillos living today. I then came up with an explanation and reasoning, that one species had given rise to the other. Then I traveled to Galapagos Islands where he would prove his point.

At Galapagos Islands I saw that the plants and animals resembled those of the nearby coast of South America. I asked himself, "why would they resemble the plants and animals of the adjacent South America coast". I then came up with an explanation that the ancestors of Galapagos species must have migrated there from South America long ago and changed after they arrived. I referred to such change as "descent with modification"evolution.

I realized that every organism has the potential to produce many offsprings during its lifetime. However, only a limited number actually survive to reproduce. I then made a key association: Individuals that posses superior physical or behavioral attributes are more likely to survive then those that are not so well endowed. The organisms that survive can pass their characteristics to there offsprings. Thus, these characteristics will increase in population, and the nature of population will gradually change. I called the process natural selection.

Here's how natural selection works: In any population, there will be variations. Individuals born with certain characteristics, e.g.,strong legs, keen eyesight, good camoflage, will enjoy an advantage over their peers. If these individuals can pass these traits on to their offspring, their offspring will enjoy the same advantages. If the surrounding environment gradually changes, it may come to pass that new characteristics are more advantageous than old ones, for instance, a new color that makes better camoflage. As the environment changes, individuals with these new characteristics will do better, live longer and produce more offspring until eventually, the population will look very different from its original version. If the population changes enough to satisfy some taxonomist, it will be classified as a new species. In other words, new species arise when the environment favors new characteristics over old ones.

As I saw it, animals differed from place to place because there habitats presented them with challenges for surviving. Each species had evolved in response to its environment. The organisms that are being evolved are better suited for the environment. Thus, I concluded that the species of a particular place evolved from species that previously lived in the same area or that migrated from areas nearby. Through my research, I found many instances of imperfect adaptation, and striking similarities across a wide variety of organisms, such as the same basic limb structure in humans, bats and whales.

When my book On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection appeared in November of 1859, it caused an immediate sensation. Many people were deeply disturbed by certain aspects of my theories, such as the implication that humans closely resemble apes. But most of scientists agree that his theory in correct for two reasons: it presented a vast body of evidence that evolution had occurred, and, more important, it presented a reasonable hypothesis explaining how evolution takes place.

For most of my life, I've taken an interest in evolution. Trying to find out if evolution is true. Traveling around the world studying plants, animals, and habitats I believe that it is. Coming up with four theories, working with many naturalists such as Lamarck, Wallace, and Malthus from all around the world, coming up with the process of natural selection and coming up with a presentable and reasonable hypothesis explaining how evolution takes place I feel very strong that evolution does occur. With my clear facts, knowledge, and many observations I hope people will understand and come into mind that evolution does occur.

Bibliography: Charles Darwin

World Wide Web:

http://www.talkorigins.org/fags/origin/introduction.html The Origin of Species May 31 2001

http://uservpxvv.sfsu.edu/-rsauzier/Darwin.html Charles Darwin- biography of the naturalist May 31, 2001

http://emporium.tumpike.net/-mscott/darwin.htm Charles Darwin overview- theories May 31, 2001

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/odyssey/debate/ How did we get here? (A cyber debate) May 31, 2001

http://biology.about.com/gi/dynamic/offsite.htm?site=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.literature.o rg%2Fauthors%2Fdarwin-charles The origins of species- Charles Darwin May 31,2001 http://emporium.tumpike.net/C/cs/guest.htm Wonderings about evolution May 31,2001

http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Aegean/8830/parttrLf6evol.html Evolution is True! ...Partly May 31,2001

CD-ROM:

Microsoft Encarta Encyclopedia 1999. CD-ROM. 1999. "Comparative Embryology".

Willy Chen

Donald Johanson on In Search for Our Origins

My name is Donald Johanson and I was born in Chicago 1943. I am from Swedish descent and my father died when I was two. I studied chemistry in University. I and my mother moved to Hartford, Connecticut where I developed a interest in anthropology from a neighbor who taught the subject. Although I originally studied chemistry at university of Connecticut, I eventually switched majors to anthropology, and worked many summers on several archeological digs. I transferred to Chicago to study under F. Clark Howell for my graduate studies.

In 1970 and 19711 visited Africa to do some field work at Omo in Ethiopia. In 1972, Me and some of my colleagues went on a short exploratory expedition to evaluate the Afar Triangle region of Ethiopia. Back in the USA, I finally completed my Ph.D. and started a new teaching position at Case Western Reserve University. From then on, I just knew this was my future. In 1973 I discovered AL 129-1, a small but humanlike knee, and the first knee known from hominid fossil record. The following years, I and my colleague Tom Gray discovered an even more spectacular find, AL 288-1, a partial skeleton of a female australopithecine. We named it Lucy. In 1975 my team found a collection of fossils at a single site which was nicknamed the first family. In 1976, more hominid fossils were discovered along with some stone tools.. After 19 , political conditions in Ethiopia prevented further expeditions for nearly 15 years. In 1981, I founded the institute of Human Origins, a nonprofit organization dedicated to the past.

Evolution is a slow process, that involves a new species replacing another species throughout time. It was always been like this and this evidence may prove that we may have been evolved from Lucy. We are almost anatomically the same, with a few exceptions. Evolution is a thing which improves and improves species as populations increase and die out with only the strongest surviving, which then pass on their own strong traits. An endless cycle causes a strong physical difference in species from the past and the species now. Sub species that are successful continue to thrive that's is how different species exist at the same time. So evolution keeps branching letting only the strongest survive.

My biggest find is a female Astralopithecine nicknamed Lucy is classified under. Discovered in 1974 in the Ethiopia, Lucy was about 3.2 millions years. The female australopithecine was about only 25 years old when she died. About 40% of her bones were found which makes it one of the most complete hominid fossil there is. She was about 3'6 weighing in about only 62 pounds. I believe that Lucy was a true transitional form. My reasons are that Lucy's leg connected together at a 15° angle while modern chimpanzees were at a 0° angle, while humans were at a 9°. In this fact, I was able to determine that Lucy walked upright like humans. That Lucy didn't branch off. This showed many years of evolution at work.

Other seems to doubt me well, Creationists often criticized that Lucy was not a true transitional form and that it is no more related to humans then chimpanzees are. One very famous person that argued that fact was Charles Oxnard. He had done several studies and concluded that the bones were too fragmented and not persevered enough to tell the complex shape of most of the bones. From this 30 qualified scientists used Oxnard's method and found that Oxnard was wrong and Lucy's bones did match the humans more then the chimpanzees did. Then there is that clue about if the bones in Lucy did indeed belong to her, her knee was found 1.2 miles away and 200 feet underground. I can prove that the knee did indeed belong to Lucy. In Lucy's time, Autstralopithecines were often hunted by leopards, when they were captured by the leopard. The leopards ate them in trees, which remains ended up falling from the tree that ate in into deep cliffs. Then the most important argument, did Lucy really walked upright? Willis a scientists claims that many anthropologists examined Lucy carefully and claimed impossible for Lucy to walk upright. One thing to make note about is that Willis's evidence for his argument was based on the claims of Zuckerman's views, and a 1971 comment made by Richard Leakey. Zuckerman's views were long abandoned and Leakey's results were considered unusual and both of thier views were not directed at Lucy but at another subject. the comments were made 3 years before Lucy was even discovered, Willis was probably confused.

Lucy being our oldest known direct ancestor is a possibility still being debated. But more and more anthropologist are finding new evidences and throwing away old ones to clarify what is it that we got here. A direct proof of evolution? Or just another creature from another branch that doesn't relate to us in anyway.

 

Sources:

http://www.humanorigins.org/ho/nonjohan/index.html. 2001. Simon Soley.

Marquez. A. Harris

A.K.A. Kenneth R. Miller

My name is Kenneth R. Miller and I write textbooks about the theory of evolution, I also debate, I'm a cyber debater on evolution. I've done several textbooks a few are l' edition biology living science and 5" edition biology. I've been studying evolution for along time now and I have come to the simple conclusion that evolution is in fact true.

People think that is a religious threat because you say that god is the creator of all living things and I firmly believe in that but, your underestimating god's complexity, yes I believe that god did create the world and all living animals in it. I also believe that he created us as complex as genes and DNA.

Evolution is real very, a English researcher looked over Darwin's book, "Origin of species" and followed up on it and did research on a species and he came to find out that the genes in species did not change one by one but in a series of gradual steps. Their characteristics begin to change as they went along.

I see evolution as a creative force, why? You may ask because evolution is not capable of making complex structures. Given a range of of sizes, shapes, colors, those individuals whose characteristics give them the best chance to reproduce will pass on traits that will increase in frequency in the next generation. The real issue therefore is whether or not the "input" into genetic variation, which is often said to be the result of random mutation, can provide the beneficial novelty that would be required to produce new structures, new systems, and even new species. Could the marvelous structures of the eye have been produce "just by chance?"

What I think about evolution that "though some insist that life as we know it sprang from a grand designers original blue prints, biology offers new evidence that organisms were cobbled together layer upon layer by a timeless tinkerer called evolution.

The pathway by which evolution can produce such structures has bben explained many times, most recently in Richard Dawkins extraordinary book, "The Blind Watchmaker." The essence of Dawkins explanation is simple. Given time and material many genetic changes will occur that result in slight improvements in a structure or system. However slight that improvement, so long as it is a genuine improvement natural selection will favor its spread throughout the species over several generations.