What was the difference between Darwin and Lamarck?

Biology

2 answers:

GrogVix [38]2 years ago

8 0

The answer is the idea of mutations was understood by both but Lamarck was able to prove it.

lesya [120]2 years ago

7 0

What was the difference between Darwin and Lamarck?

(Darwin was able to explain evolution with evidence, something Lamarck did not do!)

The idea of mutations was understood by both, but Darwin was able to prove it.

The idea of mutations was understood by both, but Lamarck was able to prove it.

Lamarck was able to explain evolution with evidence, something Darwin did not do

The First one is correct

You might be interested in

How do RNA's subcomponents affect its properties? (3 points) A. Adenine and cytosine bond with thymine and guanine, respectively

frozen [14]

Answer:

B. Base pairing occurs within an RNA molecule to give RNA the three-dimensional shape needed for specific functions.

Explanation:

Ribonucleic acid, known as RNA, is a type of nucleic acid found in living systems. In opposition to the other type of nucleic acid (DNA), RNA is a short single stranded molecule. Both DNA and RNA are made of nucleotides, composed of a phosphate group, nitrogenous bases and a pentose sugar.

The presence of ribose sugar and Uracil base in RNA instead of deoxyribose sugar and thymine base respectively structurally differentiates the molecule from DNA. However, base pairing occurs within the RNA molecule to form the three-dimensional shape of the RNA, which is key to the specificity of its function.

6 0

2 years ago

What determines how much energy a human can receive from food?

EastWind [94]

C is most likely your answer (my bad if I am wrong)

4 0

2 years ago

Please help with this problem!

Hunter-Best [27]

I believe the answer is 3.

Hope this helped you! Please follow my account, thanks!

5 0

2 years ago

Read 2 more answers

A professor at the college explained to his students that this theory of hearing is similar to piano strings. If you sound a not

tiny-mole [99]

The correct answer is C.

7 0

2 years ago

SERE

Goshia [24]

Answer: Possible economic consequences of using non-local resources include increased costs of resources, loss of jobs, increased security risks, and a trade deficit.

Explanation:

Hope it helps you if not sorry

4 0

2 years ago