Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Evolution Is Practically Useless, Admits Darwinist
Creation Evolution Headlines ^ | 08/30/06 | Creation Evolution Headlines

Posted on 09/13/2006 3:52:47 PM PDT by DannyTN

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 1,061-1,070 next last

1 posted on 09/13/2006 3:52:48 PM PDT by DannyTN
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: DaveLoneRanger

Honest Evo Ping.


2 posted on 09/13/2006 3:53:18 PM PDT by DannyTN
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DannyTN
"Evolution is practically useless, admits Darwinist."

"Well, duuuhhh!" respond Creationists.

;-)

3 posted on 09/13/2006 3:56:45 PM PDT by Pablo64 ("Everything I say is fully substantiated by my own opinion.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DannyTN

Oh whatever.

By the same reason, studying history is useless.

There are legitimate quibbles with evolutionary theories. This is not one.


4 posted on 09/13/2006 3:57:53 PM PDT by MeanWestTexan (Kol Hakavod Lezahal)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: DannyTN
Evolution cannot help us predict what new vaccines to manufacture because microbes evolve unpredictably.

Oh really? Well I suppose then that all the creationsits can skip their annual influenza vaccinations and free up the limited supply to the evos.

Junk science makes for great snake oil.

5 posted on 09/13/2006 4:01:00 PM PDT by corkoman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MeanWestTexan
"By the same reason, studying history is useless. "

He who ignores history evolution is doomed to repeat it. Nope doesn't work. History is practical and relevant. Evolution is not.

6 posted on 09/13/2006 4:01:11 PM PDT by DannyTN
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: DannyTN
Oh, yes, the market value of evolution is........?

Very good point.

Concerning language, we have a good record on the evolution of English.

However, it didn't become a new sort of language ~ just another transformation of a synthetic to an analytic language type.

Sometimes analytic languages become synthetic, or part of a synthetic language.

In biological terms this would be like cats turning into dogs, and dogs turning into cats.

Biological evolution doesn't work that way and is conceptually unable to be applied to linguistic change.

7 posted on 09/13/2006 4:01:19 PM PDT by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DannyTN

Oh I don't know, Marx, Stalin, and Hitler found a lot of usefulness for the theory of evolution. Especially Marx, in fact he wanted to dedicate the 2nd volume of Das Capital (one of the pillars of world communism) to Charles Darwin. Darwin refused this dubious honor though.


8 posted on 09/13/2006 4:01:59 PM PDT by Mogollon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: corkoman
"Oh really? Well I suppose then that all the creationsits can skip their annual influenza vaccinations and free up the limited supply to the evos."

What does evolution have to do with influenza vaccinations? The first vaccines were invented by a Creationist.

9 posted on 09/13/2006 4:03:01 PM PDT by DannyTN
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Mogollon

Cite?


10 posted on 09/13/2006 4:04:56 PM PDT by somniferum (Annoy a liberal.. Work hard and be happy.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: muawiyah

Yeah, I also questioned the darwinist's claim that no new lanquages had been observed. What about Pig Latin? Or Jive? Or Technical Jargon? Clearly language is evolving and rapidly. English today is dramatically different than English 600 years ago. That claim can't be made for animals or plants.


11 posted on 09/13/2006 4:06:32 PM PDT by DannyTN
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: MeanWestTexan

BTTT


12 posted on 09/13/2006 4:08:03 PM PDT by Bob Eimiller (Kerry, Kennedy, Pelosi, Leahy, Kucinich, Durbin Pro Abort Catholics Excommunication?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: DannyTN

Evolution is for people who don't believe in God's Greatness and Power.


13 posted on 09/13/2006 4:09:19 PM PDT by Suzy Quzy ("When Cabals Go Kabooms"....upcoming book on Mary McCarthy's Coup-Plotters.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Suzy Quzy

Evolution makes an atheist comfortable with his atheism (to paraphrase Richard Dawkins).


14 posted on 09/13/2006 4:13:16 PM PDT by My2Cents (A pirate's life for me.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Suzy Quzy
Evolution is for people who don't believe in God's Greatness and Power.

Evolution is a scientific theory and does not address God in any way shape or form.

15 posted on 09/13/2006 4:13:28 PM PDT by RadioAstronomer (Senior member of Darwin Central)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: DannyTN
The solution to the problem is to simply note that we have biologists, particularly botanists and bacteriologists, pushing evolution as a world-view for everything.

I doubt any of them ever noticed that there is a vast science devoted to the study of languages.

This is one of the reasons biological science researchers have to hire "word smiths" ~ otherwise no one would figure out what they were saying ~ not that they are illiterate even if they seem to be.

I learned a new word today: "Balkansprachbund" . This has to do with certain linguistic structures common to all Balkan languages irrespective of what language branch they came from.

There is debate over whether or not these languages are melding together, or simply adhering to some common standards that facilitate communication.

Apparently none of the folks involved in the debate ever studied Latvian, Greek or Latin ~ there they'd see that entire separate languages have been absorbed, in toto, right down to the conjugations and declensions. I think it's Greek that shows signs of having absorbed a "female only" language group at one time.

Biologists would have a devil of a time explaining all of this in the language of evolution as they understand it.

16 posted on 09/13/2006 4:16:17 PM PDT by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Suzy Quzy
Evolution is for people who don't believe in God's Greatness and Power.

The corollary is that rank ignorance is for those who do (if you accept the above statement).

17 posted on 09/13/2006 4:16:43 PM PDT by Physicist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: TexasGreg

Ping


18 posted on 09/13/2006 4:16:46 PM PDT by GarySpFc (Jesus on Immigration, John 10:1)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DannyTN
Even though I think Darwinian evolution is completely bogus, I think this is a silly point to make. It hardly invalidates the concept.

Saturn has rings. This knowledge has thus far been completely useless to mankind; but it's still true.

ML/NJ

19 posted on 09/13/2006 4:17:57 PM PDT by ml/nj
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RadioAstronomer
"Evolution is a scientific theory and does not address God in any way shape or form."

Perhaps, but if evolution's only practical effect it to explain where we came from... And to many, that explanation doesn't fit the data as well as a Creator.

One really has to question, is exclusion of God a form of negatively addressing God.

20 posted on 09/13/2006 4:18:16 PM PDT by DannyTN
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 1,061-1,070 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson