Why is there no Creationist representation in the biotech/pharmaceutical industry?
Every new drug, cell line, animal model, grant proposal, research study- all of them, at one point or another, describe their mechanism in the context of evolution.
Not talking about government or universities — this is private industry where billions are to be made (and just as many lives potentially affected) by products derived from capital investments.
None of which are ever justified in writing, seminars, or other presentation using Creationist principles.
Any guess why?
==Every new drug, cell line, animal model, grant proposal, research study- all of them, at one point or another, describe their mechanism in the context of evolution.
Pure BS.
“The biomedical sciences have flourished because they are experimental and have direct practical applications. But their success is based on a profound lack of interest in the question of how the organisms we study were formed. As long as we can fix the machines, we do not care how they were designed—and many rest content with the idea of a supernatural Designer. Evolution requires an interest in origins, and an acceptance of the different techniques needed to study them, which is simply not shared by many biologists.”
Bowler, Peter J., “The Status of Evolutionism Examined,” review of Monad to Man by Michael Ruse (Harvard University Press, 1996, 596 pp.), American Scientist, vol. 85 (May/June 1997), pp. 274-275. Bowler is on the faculty in History and Philosophy of Science, The Queen’s University, Belfast.
I’m sorry, if you think evolution has much to do with drug research, other than susceptible bacteria being selected out of antibiotic-rich environments in favor of preexisting strains of immune bacteria, then you are deluded.
Evolution does not have to do with any material accomplishment of technology or medicine, because evolution has no predictive power.
Yes,
Several reasons.
First, universities MANDATE ONLY evolution and remove any professors that try to say different (Iowa State University is one classic example).
Second, evolution has become a religion to many who teach it and will not be allowed to be challenged except by their straw man analysis.
Third, posts here by the pro evolution side use pure derision which is not unlike many who have taken their places as part of the educated elite in this country. It can not be challenged seriously no matter what.
Oh, please explain how every drug, cell line, animal model, etc. describe their “mechanism in the context of evolution.”?
Your post is strictly your opinion of how you believe things really are rather than how they actually are in this world.
Oh, one more thing...the classic prove a negative argument...why no representation in the biotech/pharm industry? So, explain why? a negative? I suggest you begin following the rules of common accepted logic that even liberals typically observe (not radical liberals).
Or the oil industry?
Where are the Flood Geologists advising oil companies on where to drill based of their theory of how sediments were formed?