DQ1 - sit outside and I would have to say that no frogs are...

Info iconThis preview shows page 1. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
D Q - 1 | 1 I am choosing the spontaneous generation theory and out of that, I will be explaining that frogs do not just come from muddy soil because they always appear in that environment. I would have to say that there has always been something out there, that has said that non-living objects could give birth to living objects. I personally would have to disagree with this since if you bring in medical evidence. With the medical evidence, it would prove that previous hypothesis would be incorrect. The fact that frogs just come from mud is just ludicrous since the cell has to be formed and we learn from little kids that frogs derive from tadpoles. In a test that can be performed by anyone you can take a couple pots of mud and let them
Background image of page 1
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Unformatted text preview: sit outside and I would have to say that no frogs are going to be crawling out of the mud. Now if you were to have a little kid pool and let frogs live in it you will see tons of little tadpoles growing and you will be able to see them grow into frogs without any type of mud. So if you really wanted to do a test you can take non-living object and do many different things and to my knowledge you will not be able to get anything living out of it in any kind of a way. So as a result of this “spontaneous generation” even though thought to be correct for many years can be proven incorrect....
View Full Document

This note was uploaded on 04/24/2011 for the course CJS 230 taught by Professor Sherman during the Spring '11 term at University of Phoenix.

Ask a homework question - tutors are online