What has creationism done for humanity?

The "evolution scientists are evil liars" bit is one I see used a lot. Good conspiracy theory, therefore fitting of ATS, but there is one giant hole in it that probably keeps most sane people from buying it.

What is the motive?

Do you people honestly think that thousands of modern biologists would sit in their basements, laughing maniacally, spending thousands of hours fabricating evidence to prove a theory?

On the contrary. Biology has advanced our knowledge of living systems immensely; improved human lifespan and life quality by a enormous degree, and certainly saved and lead to the production of, literally, billions of human lives. Even if Mao, Stalin, Hitler, etc were a "product of evolutionism", which they most certainly were not, biology, and it's central pillar, evolutionary theory, has saved billions more than it has killed (and it has killed no one).

Consider what life would be like if medicine, vaccines, or farming, or ranching, had never been discovered. These are all, essentially, products of biology, and evolution theory, as alluded to above, is the central pillar of modern biology, and the two go hand in hand.

The "darwinism leads to social darwinism" bit is equivalent to leveling attacks against chemistry because knowledge of chemistry helped produce the Manhattan Project. Chemistry also lead to the production of fertilizers and the thousands of other chemicals that make our lives veritable heaven compared to that of our ancestors.

On the other hand, what has creationism done for anyone? Has it saved any lives? No... has it advanced our understanding of anything? No... it is a shrug of the shoulders, an "I dunno" dressed up in spirituality and ritual. It is anti-progress and a desperate attack on knowledge and science.

Generally, a rational secular mind wouldn't have too much of a problem with this. I don't care if someone happens to believe that there are fairies at the bottom of the garden. However, you can bet that if they attempted to subvert and attack real science I'd take issue. This is exactly the line that creationism and it's rich cousin ID have crossed.

So, to restate; exactly what benefit has creationism had on human society and civilization?

reply to post by SlyCM

what benefit has creationism had on human society and civilization?

It's a strong motivator not to repeat history...I sure hope if and when organized religion disappears (oh man, please) it never makes a comeback.

As a matter of fact, if it did go away, I think one can make an excellent case to Re-Write the History books, so future generations were not tainted nor tempted to make the same asinine mistake...

Just a constructive thought...

reply to post by SlyCM


ummm how has evolutionism provided all that?

as far as i was aware evolution was still as much a "Theory" as intelligent design and creationism.

untill such time as scientists can produce "Life" using nothing but amino acids evolution will continue to be nothing more than a "Theory"

Originally posted by Demandred
reply to post by SlyCM

 

ummm how has evolutionism provided all that?

as far as i was aware evolution was still as much a "Theory" as intelligent design and creationism.

untill such time as scientists can produce "Life" using nothing but amino acids evolution will continue to be nothing more than a "Theory"

Not that this is relevant to the thread, but you're totally wrong about all of those points.

First, it's not "evolutionism." You guys always like to add "-ism" onto the end of words, but it's not a religious belief system.

Speciation (that is, evolution) has been observed under experimental and laboratory settings. ID and creationism are not "theories" in any scientific sense because they cannot be tested, and they cannot be observed. The arguments supporting them (irreducible complexity, the watchmaker analogy, etc.) are made from ignorance.

Amino acids, the building blocks of proteins, have been synthesized from inorganic materials simulating natural processes, but that's not part of the scope of evolutionary theory.

Do your homework on subjects you're trying to discredit.

reply to post by SamuraiDrifter


sure i will just as soon as you give me something to reaserch ... like how evolution gave us so many wonderful things?

as far as i was aware science gave us those things not evolution, and evading the point that evolutionists still cant spontaniously create life from a primordial soup kinda kicks the legs out from under the whole evolution theory ..

Originally posted by SamuraiDrifter
Amino acids, the building blocks of proteins, have been synthesized from inorganic materials simulating natural processes, but that's not part of the scope of evolutionary theory.

Do your homework on subjects you're trying to discredit.

actually i have .. was yesterday reading up on this very point your not talking about the experiment that was done in Germany by any chance?

Newspapers around the world proclaimed: ‘German chemists have produced living cells from a combination of amino acids …’1

If true, then this would be remarkable. Even the simplest free-living cell has 482 genes coding for all the necessary enzymes, the chemical machines of life. The enzymes are composed of about 400 building blocks (amino acids) each on average, in precise sequences, and all in the ‘left-handed’ form.2 Of course, these genes are functional only in the presence of pre-existing translational and replicating machinery, a cell membrane, etc.

Did scientists create life?

and yes it is apart of the evolutionary theory because how else was life supposed to start?

[edit on 7-10-2008 by Demandred]

reply to post by Demandred


Not this nonsense again. The origins of life is abiogenesis. How the first life became different species is evolution. Two different theories that don't overlap.

Clearly your science education is horrifically lacking. Please at least read the wikipedia article on evolution, and get back to us.

Originally posted by SlyCM
...Consider what life would be like if medicine, vaccines, or farming, or ranching, had never been discovered.

We had ALL of those before Darwin came up with his theory. Care to try again?

If you were REALLY that interesting in science, you would know that most of the scientific greats in the world (you know, the ones they talk about in history books) were almost all "creationists".

Originally posted by Demandred

and yes it is apart of the evolutionary theory because how else was life supposed to start?

[edit on 7-10-2008 by Demandred]

Read this and remember it:

Evolution is the study of the process by which living organisms develop and diversify from earlier forms of living organisms.

Evolution has nothing to do with how life began.

The scientific discipline that studies how life emerged from inanimate organic and inorganic matter is called Abiogenesis.

These are two distinctly different fields of scientific study just like Biology and Physics.

reply to post by sir_chancealot


We did have them before Darwin, but since Darwin (especially DNA, which demonstrated beyond a doubt that Darwin was correct), the theory of evolution has allowed science to improve each and every one beyond belief (no pun intended). Medicines for new diseases are improved more rapidly, as the underlying genetic makeup of the pathogens is studied, traced, and pre-emptively countered by new drugs. Same with farming - now we know how hereditary works (thanks Chuck!) we know how to make animals with desirable traits more rapidly, and how to fix gene pools that are stagnating. Before we understood evolution, we were stabbing in the dark. Now we know why some of the things attempted work, and why some fail. It has allowed us to move from "guess" to "know".

And yes, a bunch of those guys in the history books are creationist, but then they didn't know of any alternatives. Now only the ignorant are creationist.

reply to post by SlyCM

exactly what benefit has creationism had on human society and civilization?

None. Its benefits are to the species.

Belief in it is like physical asymmetry: a marker of selective unfitness.

A sort of peacock's tail in reverse, if you see what I mean.

reply to post by Demandred



sure i will just as soon as you give me something to reaserch ... like how evolution gave us so many wonderful things?

as far as i was aware science gave us those things not evolution, and evading the point that evolutionists still cant spontaniously create life from a primordial soup kinda kicks the legs out from under the whole evolution theory ..


OK, where to begin with how wrong this post is....

Evolution gave us the larger brains that were required to create everything we credit science with ergo evolution gave us everything.

You are correct when you say scientists are yet to spontaniously create life, this is true. However Abiogenesis is thought to have taken millions of years so the scientist have some time yet.

And while i hate to kick the legs out from under a creationist, have any of you managed to create a universe of infinite wonder and beauty and diversity in a week?

Didn't think so

Originally posted by dave420
reply to post by sir_chancealot

 

We did have them before Darwin, but since Darwin (especially DNA, which demonstrated beyond a doubt that Darwin was correct), the theory of evolution has allowed science to improve each and every one beyond belief (no pun intended). Medicines for new diseases are improved more rapidly, as the underlying genetic makeup of the pathogens is studied, traced, and pre-emptively countered by new drugs. Same with farming - now we know how hereditary works (thanks Chuck!) we know how to make animals with desirable traits more rapidly, and how to fix gene pools that are stagnating. Before we understood evolution, we were stabbing in the dark. Now we know why some of the things attempted work, and why some fail. It has allowed us to move from "guess" to "know".

And yes, a bunch of those guys in the history books are creationist, but then they didn't know of any alternatives. Now only the ignorant are creationist.

Really? Medicines for new diseases? Did you notice that back in the 50s, you know, when people still believed in that silly thing called God that we weren't inventing "treatments" we were CURING DISEASES. Since "Darwinism" and "Atheism" crept into colleges, universities, and such, almost no new cures for disease have been found. I know of one: ulcers. And the guy that found the cause and cure of that bucked the system, AND ALMOST LOST HIS MEDICAL LICENSE BECAUSE OF IT.

If you think "Darwin" allowed us to "know how to make animals with desirable traits more rapidly", please! Farmers and livestock breeders knew this 10,000 years ago. If we are SOOOOO good at this now, why not breed tame animals from wild ones. I'm sure people everywhere would pay top dollar for a totally tame and docile big cat (Tiger, Lion, etc.), or perhaps a bear, or a shark?

If we know so much, why have no new animals been domesticated within written history?

So, we have moved from guess to know? Ok, tell me what environment to put a worm in, to have it evolve into a beetle.

reply to post by sir_chancealot


Thanks for demonstrating to everyone, so vividly, just how much you know about science, and in particular, evolution. Hint: not a great deal.

Please, for the benefit of your friends, your family, your society, and indeed your future - READ ABOUT SCIENCE BEFORE YOU TRY TO DESTROY IT! You can't approve of science and not the theory of evolution - for the theory is the direct result of scientific observations and measurements.

I'm not saying there wasn't medicine before DNA was discovered or before Darwin wrote his theory down, or that selective breeding didn't happen before, but since, we have made massive leaps and bounds, accelerating our abilities in both fields massively.

Of course that doesn't fit in with your incredibly narrow world-view, so you find some twisted 'logical' way to discount it without further thought. You are the height of irrationality. Fantastic work.

How to turn a worm into a beetle? We now know that's not possible. It could evolve into something similar to a beetle, given enough time and the correct series of environments, but it won't actually be a beetle. It's called 'convergent evolution', and has been studied greatly.

Please get a clue - this is embarassing for you.

[edit on 7/10/08 by dave420]

Originally posted by Demandred
sure i will just as soon as you give me something to reaserch ... like how evolution gave us so many wonderful things?

as far as i was aware science gave us those things not evolution, and evading the point that evolutionists still cant spontaniously create life from a primordial soup kinda kicks the legs out from under the whole evolution theory ..

Evolution hasn't given us anything. It's just the explanation of how biodiversity arose on the planet from single cell life. How life got started is the territory of abiogenesis, which is a totally different subject from evolution. It's being worked on by scientists, however, who aren't willing to accept the cop-out explanation of "god did it."

actually i have .. was yesterday reading up on this very point your not talking about the experiment that was done in Germany by any chance?

No, I'm not. It was done at the University of Chicago in the 1950's. And I'm glad you've been reading up on the subject, whereas I am a biology undergrad student and have been taught literally for hours on the subject and tested on it multiple times.

and yes it is apart of the evolutionary theory because how else was life supposed to start?

Again, that's not part of evolutionary theory. Evolution explains the diversity of life, not its origins.

[edit on 7-10-2008 by SamuraiDrifter]

What I find interesting is that once again creationists have an opportunity to defend their beliefs...

And once again all they can do is try to attack and discredit science and evolution.

I give that a fail.

reply to post by SamuraiDrifter


ok then if evolution is supposed to explain the diversity of life and not its origins then why do people put it up against creationism which is to explain the origin of life not diversity?

now you state that evolution gave us nothing and its just an explination about how biodiversity came about from single cell life, yet you refuse to elaborate on how this single cell life came about, from my point of view i can accept that bio diversity has played a role with plants and animals evolving, how ever evolution cant answer the 1 big question how did life start and thats the question all evolutionists evade like the plague, because its something their theory cant explain. which is why it always comes back to beinging a theory.

and secondly in your OP you state that evolution has given us so many things and now your saying it hasnt given us anything

Evolution hasn't given us anything. It's just the explanation of how biodiversity arose on the planet from single cell life. How life got started is

i dont suppose you want to clarify this?

Why don't we look at this differently.

Pretend that we know NOTHING about evolution, and get back to the original question.

What has creationism given to advance life and society on this planet?

For a theory/fact etc, to stand, it must stand ON ITS OWN and not because there are discrepancies in an alternate theory. Pointing out the wrongness of the alternate theory in NO WAY makes the one being argued about more correct.

Carry on.

reply to post by SlyCM


well that was a stimulating post, thats 2 seconds of my life ill never be able to get back.

me personally im a catholic but im not a creationist neither am i an evolutionist or an IDist, i suspect there is truth in all 3 theorys and to embrace one to the exclusion of all others i think is alittle narrow minded, and after all thats what were here to do on ATS isnt it deny ignorance?

pesonally i believe that life was more than likley created on this planet by something with intelligence, wether its god or an entity that to our primitive brains would appear god like i dont know, but i believe the life that was originally created on this planet bears absolutley no resemblance to the life forms flora nad fauna of today and i also suspect that it was this lets call it an "Entity" that manipulated our genetics and gave us sentience how ever like everything else this is just a theory but its one that makes the most sence to me

Originally posted by juniperberry
Why don't we look at this differently.

Pretend that we know NOTHING about evolution, and get back to the original question.

What has creationism given to advance life and society on this planet?

For a theory/fact etc, to stand, it must stand ON ITS OWN and not because there are discrepancies in an alternate theory. Pointing out the wrongness of the alternate theory in NO WAY makes the one being argued about more correct.

Carry on.

how about morals and values, a sense of "community" where like minded people came together to create something they themselves couldnt have achieved alone.

which you could say was the foundation of modern day life where today people work together and create all the technology we see today