Project 1: My Comments

I'm having trouble finding much wrong here.

"An example of one such mistake is the tendency to trivialize the argument to a dispute over a literal versus figurative interpretation of ¿day¿ in Genesis"

Technically nothing is wrong here but I had to read it three or four times to figure out what the sentence was saying.

"Those who trivialize the debate into a dispute between a literal and figurative interpretation of time in Genesis are guilty of one such mistaken compromise."

Granted, the sentence I just wrote is exactly the same length as yours and I'm not really sure its any clearer.

"Another common compromise many make, is the belief that God defined the physical laws of the universe"

I don't think you need a comma after make.


I'm having trouble finding a way to lengthen your paper, but I would change the formatting a bit. The image background you had on the webapage made it kind of hard for me to read the text. I think the page looks good though, and the problem could probally be eliminated by double or 1.5 spacing the lines.

"I believe that so many people refer to evolution as a lie, or, more bluntly, condemn it as the work of Satan, is that the idea of evolution offers an alternative to the story of creation in Genesis"

This sentence is really long and has a lot of appositives. I was going to try to revise it but I'm not completely sure what the sentence is saying. If you mean that people condemn evolution because its an alternative to the bible I would revise it like this:

"Many people who believe that evolution is false do so because it offers an alternative to the story of creation in Genesis."

Then the sentence after this should be removed because it becomes repetitive.


Later, in this sentence, "After all, science is not omnipotent" I think you might consider using a word other than omnipotent. Perhaps perfect, but there is probally a better word than that.



The last paragraph made it seem that your character was reconciling the two views. If this is what he is really doing, I think you might want to support the reconcilitation more in the paper. It seemed to me that most of the evidence cited did not show that the two are compatible.

Good paper.

Since they are good friends, I think it might be funny if he referred to Darwin as Charly Darwin. Then again, this speach is a formal and that comment might be stupid.

Moving on.

" As many of you know, Mr. Darwin and I both spent several years studying various life forms to form our theories on the natural world."

I think the two different uses of the form in three words is too much. Perhaps "spent several years studying life on earth to form our ..."

" between man and other creatures. Like all vertebrates, he has a skeletal system, "

I was briefly confused when I read the word "he." I didnt know who you were referring to. I think if you said "between other creatures and man. Like all vertebrates, he has a skeletal system."

". The homology present here, that is similar structure but different use, strongly suggests ..."

I think instead of defining homology with an appositive you should lose the big word all together and just subsitute its definition for it.

Good paper.

I like how you open the paper with a quote, it is a pretty intense opening-that is good.

"¿The moral universe is dominated by politics and jurisprudence ¿ it is the universe of Rousseau¿1 ¿ not God alone."

I think it would hit even harder though if you deleted the alone from the end of the sentence.

Perhaps this is debate jargon but I thought this sentence was a little akward:

"I stand firmly resolved that:"

Specifically the word resolved. I might change it to "I stand firmly by my belief that:" "I am resolved"

This is picky but: "As a early leader" should be "As an early leader."


Later in the paper I would revise this sentence:
" Moving on to my second contention, evolution has a strong and tangible foundation"

"I would like to move to my second contention, that evolution clearly has a strong and tangible foundation."

"I am concerned with communicating my findings not only with my fellow scientists, but with the American public"

I'm not sure if there some someone who decides what is technically correct as far as pronouns and certain verbs, but i don't feel that "with" and "communicate" jive all that well together. I think he is concerned to comunnicate his finds "to" his fellow scientists, not "with."

As far as adding something to the paper, I think a transition paragraph between your third to last and the fourth to last paragraph might make the ending flow a bit more smoothly.

The talk of how miraculous it is that humans got here by chance is cool. I like to think about it.

"We live in a changing world. This world has continued evolving for millions of years and will continue to evolve for many more."

I think the first use of "continued" in this sentence should changed to "been." I'm not sure, but there may be some verb tense agreement issues with "has continued" and you use "continue" again in the same sentence. I think it makes more sense with been also.

Reading it I was little confused who was talking and when . I think a paragraph at the beginning explaining who is the speaker and when he is talking would elimate this confusion.

good paper.

The first paragraph is hilarious. I like funny starts.

"Anyway, several of those in the room aren¿t supposed to be there themselves"

I think you should replace "themselves" with "either" in this sentence. Also I think you need a comma after Wilberforce in the next sentence.

As far as expansion, I would add more to Bryan's actual speach. It seemed like you spent as much time introducing him as he did speaking.

Good paper.