What has creation science brought us?

[Matthewj1985]

Now keep in mind I am not asking what have scientist who are also creationist brought us, I am asking what the field of creation science has given us. Anything from a cure for cancer to a better understanding of our universe and how it works. From what I can see the creation movement has been successful in opening a for profit museum and losing lawsuits, other than that I really don't know of anything that creation science has done for the world.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uephBmkupvQ&feature=channel_page

 

[AV1611VET]

Now keep in mind I am not asking what have scientist who are also creationist brought us, I am asking what the field of creation science has given us.

Nothing, as far as I know --- I don't believe in that term.

Attaching the word "science" to the word "creation" demeans the Creation in the first place, as the Creation didn't rely on science --- it relied on omnipotence.

 

[busterdog]

It brings me closer to God. That's a good thing, I am pretty sure. And yes, that is a cure for cancer.

 

[Ave Maria]

It has brought us a greater understanding of the God created world that we live in.

 

[Epiphoskei]

What has any "science" dedicated to the question of origins brought us?

Nothing scientific, but in society it's brought a whole lot of mass murder, eugenics, abortion, genocide, and myriad other forms of social darwinism.

 

[shernren]

What has any "science" dedicated to the question of origins brought us?

Nothing scientific, but in society it's brought a whole lot of mass murder, eugenics, abortion, genocide, and myriad other forms of social darwinism.

Hitler was a vegetarian too!

I call Godwin's Law. ^^

 

[Mallon]

The fundies are really taking over these days, aren't they?

 

[busterdog]

There is no such thing as Creation Science, because the word "Creation" insults the term "Science".

This is what the Creation theory states, "God did it".

Now this style of thinking can be attributed mostly to simple thinkers who would prefer to not invesitgate the matter to it's full potential and believe a bunch of stories from people who decided to write down what they thought they knew.

Now this isn't to say God doesn't exist, but it is to say that kids, don't believe everytihng you read

Because look what I can write:

And the great Cranberry Muffin of the sky came down and sprinkled the ground with his fertile cumbs and gave it life, and he shook his cranberries to the grund and from it sprouted the tree, the animals ,and the people.

Now look what I just wrote, since I wrote it, does this mean 2000 years from now, it will be absolute law? That those who do not believe it are heretics and know nothing, and as some people say, should be Burned? No. This means that I did not know what Iwas speaking of, and so created a story in order to answer the question I didn't have an answer for.

Believe in God, but don't think that everything in the bible is true.

Seems to me that this post poses and interesting question. Its sort of like the octagon ultimate fighting thing, who has the raw power to real beat someone else's brains in, and that audacity to try. Either that or some sort of schoolyard challenge of some bully to see whether someone is boy enough to take a swing at you.

It isnt so much about being right, is it, in an ultimate sense? That would be kind of lame to post here, with this type of approach. The notion of really resolving ultimate questions with such confidence in human vision seems to be what you take issue with, and I agree about that much. You couldn't possibly have assumed you could solve it that simply. That would be too overthetop.

So, it really comes down to whether a creationist could give you a wedgy and take your lunch, intellectually, doesnt it?

 

[busterdog]

The fundies are really taking over these days, aren't they?

He says tongue in cheeck.

Surely you dont mean the marxist fundamentalists in Washington?

 

[archaeologist2]

This is what the Creation theory states, "God did it".

i find this statement interesting as it uses the very statement that God used as an insult to secular science and those who follow that.

we as believers CANNOT change what God has said or did thus since God has said throughout scriptures that HE DID IT, we in obedience must say the same thing.

secular science is wasting millions of dollars and thousands of hours pursuing their own idea of origins and how life began, when the Bible already states HOW it was done> God spoke it appeared. thus the answert to How is: God's power, God's will, God's voice

those that pursue other options are just disbelieving God and waste valuable resources on things that do not exist and miss the truth.

those that feel insulted by such an answer as the quoted remark probably feel deprived of figringhtings out for themselves yet why waste thetime and money when there are more inportant things to do--solve many of the diseases that plagued mankind, create better containers that resist contaminatin, build better cars that do not pollute.

how much more beneficial for the kingdom of God if the people who claimed to be christian stopped pursuing secular science and used that money to build wells or a sewage system for those poor countries and tribes which suffer daily.

which is the chrisian thing to do? pursue a lie or help others?

Because look what I can write:

going to the absurd never helps one's case.

Now this isn't to say God doesn't exist, but it is to say that kids, don't believe everytihng you read

if you do not believe what you read inthe Bible then you have nothing left in which to believe. nothing else makes sense and nothing else changes lives like the Bible and Christ.

 

[itisdeliciouscake]

what has evolutionary science brought us?

 

[lemmings]

what has evolutionary science brought us?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Artificial_selection

Better foods and medicine, without the agricultural techniques developed in the 20th century, there is no way that we could support 6.5 Billion people without causing massive damage to the environment like what we saw during the Great Depression.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolutionary_computation

Evolutionary computation is still in its infancy, but in it is going to be the only way to develop AI and it has already shown advances in the manufacturing industry.

 

[busterdog]

what has evolutionary science brought us?

It has increased my faith tremendously, obviously.

It is so wrong so often,

so oblivious to its own errors,

so intolerant of dissent,

so incapable of acknowledging the merits of opposing arguments and

yet so willing to change its fundamental tenets in the most radical ways -- so long as and to the extent that God cannot be acknowledged,

and so brittle and so provoked when challenged on the basis of God's Word,

that

I know that it can't be God's truth and the relative worth of God's Word is only proven inestimably greater.

 

[Epiphoskei]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Artificial_selection

Better foods and medicine, without the agricultural techniques developed in the 20th century, there is no way that we could support 6.5 Billion people without causing massive damage to the environment like what we saw during the Great Depression.

That's not evolution, that's just genetics. Prior to Neo-Darwinism, Evolution and Mendelian genetics were in opposition to each other. Remember, Darwinism was essentially Lamarkian. The belief that microevolution leads to macroevolution is impossible within Mendelian genetics. In Lamarkism, so called microevolution adds new, aquired traits to a species. In Mendelism, genes can be lost by not being inherited, but no new genes can be introduced through selection, thus natural selection in and of itself cannot lead to macroevolution. Accordingly, Neo-Darwinism posits that new genes are added through mutation alone, and natual selection only removes the bad new genes.

We should not believe, then, that any form of Mendelian genetics were somehow brought to us courtasy of evolution, or that selection in a Mendelian system should be regarded as a form of evolution, even in a micro sense.

Incientally, artificial selection, othewise known as animal husbandry, has been in existance for millenia without any help from evolution.

 

[Mallon]

what has evolutionary science brought us?

A testable explanation for the origin of life's diversity.

 

[Epiphoskei]

First, what good is that? Who does that really help? And second, the past isn't testable.

 

[Mallon]

First, what good is that? Who does that really help?

I would argue that knowing where we come from can teach us about where we're going. That helps not just us, but all species on earth. Many biodiversity conservation programs rely on evolutionary palaeoecology. Check out the work being done in the Serengeti-Mara ecosystem by A. R. E. Sinclair and others.

And second, you can't test the past.

We can indeed test predictions about events that occurred in the past. For example, if someone told you there was a gunfight on the corner of Fifth and Main, you could test that account by going to that corner and seeing for yourself whether there is any evidence of such a crime having occurred (e.g., bullet holes, blood stains, etc.). The same forensic principles apply to the evolutionary sciences.

 

[Epiphoskei]

We can indeed test predictions about events that occurred in the past. For example, if someone told you there was a gunfight on the corner of Fifth and Main, you could test that account by going to that corner and seeing for yourself whether there is any evidence of such a crime having occurred (e.g., bullet holes, blood stains, etc.). The same forensic principles apply to the evolutionary sciences.

That's not "testing" in a scientific sense. This may seem like splitting hairs, however it is necesarry that we differentiate between historical analysis and the scientific method. The latter tends to settle questions. A process happens and you can do the same experiment over and over again to prove it. The former, historical analysis of evidence, often, if not always, leads to drastically different conclusions.

 

[suzmot]

"Evolution Science" also plays a large role in development of new antibiotics and other medicines.

 

[Epiphoskei]

Again, how? You cannot simply conflate evolutionary theory with all forms of genetics and biology. They existed before it and would exist without it. Any true science can be derived from experimentation and the scientific method alone, without any necesarry input from theories of origins.