First, who cares if there is no cure for the hanta virus? That wasn't the point. The point was, researchers were able to identify the killer through discovering its place on the tree of life. We give you the evidence you claim does not exist, and you move the goalposts. Typical creationis.
Secondly, if you think the fugu fish research belies the article, you have a very poor understanding indeed of genetics (as if that weren't already apparent by your posts). You share a lot of genes with the fugu fish. You share a lot of genes with every critter on this planet. However, you share more of your genes with your closest relative, the chimpanzee. It is these shared genes which allow researchers to place critters on the tree of life.
Perhaps those who come down with it?
Again you show the typical disregard for human life of evolutionists. The challenge put to you was to show how evolution has helped humanity, clearly it has not when your own example, your 'refutation' of my statement in post# 124 that:
And 150 years later not only does it not cure belly ache, but it has not led to a single useful application. Instead, evolution keeps getting in the way of science instead of leading it to new discoveries.
is no refutation at all. One would think that after 150 years you could come up with something worthwhile - you who have been on these threads for so many years cannot even give a decent example of how evolution has helped humanity.
As to the fugu fish, you bet it does show that your nonsense about comparing the trees of life provides any benefits is total nonsense. Scientists have been doing it for thousands of years. Long before evolution Aristotle made a system of classifying species and compared the features and their organisms. This went on for thousands of years before Darwin and Linnaeus - many years before Darwin , set up the basic system of classifying still used today. This is another example of evolutionists claiming for themselves something which they had nothing to do with.
Further, the discovery of vaccination by Edward Jenner, using cowpox to innoculate humans against smallpox shows, like many other examples in medicine, that scientists are always looking throughout the animal kingdom for something to use, they could care less about evolutionary theory in doing so. In fact, they look to exotic plants and bacteria far removed from humans for medicines and other scientific discoveries. For example, some of the great DNA discoveries have come from examining fruit flies. Insects are teaching us about humans!
Which brings us back to the fugu fish. We are learning from a fish what we have been unable to learn from our closer cousins (as evolutionists call them) because all living things come from one maker. If evolution were true, the changes in the hundreds of millions of years since these fish supposedly arose would have led to great changes making them totally irrelevant to our research needs. Instead we find the genome closely similar to ours in spite of the hundreds of millions of years of supposed evolution between us and the fugu. Just what we would expect if species were created. Stasis is proof against evolution, regardless of what you and your speaking out of both sides of the mouth evo friends may have to say. To get from bacteria to humans by gradual evolution all species need to be in a constant state of change and transformation. The fugu's close relationship genetically to man shows this evolutionary assumption to be totally false.