Does evolution have any practical implications? (This is NOT Creation vs Evolution)

[Homie]

Regardless wheter evolution or Creationism or something completely different is the true theory of how the world came about, does it matter practically or is it purely a philosophical question to help us understand the world and its origins?

I say it is philosophical, one does not need to believe in evolution to produce advances in science, to produce the end results of science; which is products. Do you think one couldn't have invented the car, the aeroplane, penicillin, raw oil destillation, nuclear power etc.. without the belief in evolution?

Ok, science is here to be useful for us, right? We use it to make pharmaceuticals (biology), machines (physics), substances used in products (chemistry) etc...

So when making a drug or curing a disease, it doesn't matter one tid bit if the scientist believes the Bible or Darwin. Evolution or creationism has no practical implication, so why is evolution even taught in science class when it is of philosophical importance only?

So I challenge you, if you disagree, to show one example of how evolution has practical implications in science by showing one product that couldn't be possible without the belief in evolution.

 

[blackheart]

You forget that there's THEORETICAL SCIENCE as well as PRACTICAL/APPLIED SCIENCE.

 

[Homie]

And I predict that a vast majority will vote that we need it to conduct science, but not one will be able to show how.
Yet another proof that it is faith-based only, and religious in nature.

 

[Perfection]

Absolutely! Germs evolve, and we have to design our epidemiological strategy to compensate!

How do you think we get new strains of bacteria and viruses?

 

[Homie]

You forget that there's THEORETICAL SCIENCE as well as PRACTICAL/APPLIED SCIENCE.

Don't avoid the question. How does it affect us in our daily lives if our scientists were creationist or evolutionist? My point is that it does not matter, just like it doesn not matter wheter a scientist is Christian or Jew.

 

[Homie]

Absolutely! Germs evolve, and we have to design our epidemiological strategy to compensate!

How do you think we get new strains of bacteria and viruses?

Play by the rules Perfection, read the title and OP. I am NOT saying wheter evolution or creationism is true, I am saying that practically it doesn't matter, only philosophically it matters.

 

[blackheart]

Let's see...

Human Genome
Virology
Immunology
Ethnical Divergence

Here, I found a good one:
http://www.wired.com/news/medtech/0,66198-0.html?tw=wn_story_page_prev2

 

[Yuri2356]

And I predict that a vast majority will vote that we need it to conduct science, but not one will be able to show how.
Yet another proof that it is faith-based only, and religious in nature.

Name for me one practical application of [Black hole Physics]! Do you think one couldn't have invented the car, the aeroplane, penicillin, raw oil destillation, nuclear power etc.. without the belief in [Black Hole Physics]?

I predict that a vast majority will vote that we need it to conduct science, but not one will be able to show how.
Yet another proof that [Black hole physics] are faith-based only, and religious in nature.


Theories need not have immediate and direct effects on invention and day to day life to be a part of the grander picture of the universe formed by use of the scientific method.

 

[blackheart]

Don't avoid the question. How does it affect us in our daily lives if our scientists were creationist or evolutionist? My point is that it does not matter, just like it doesn not matter wheter a scientist is Christian or Jew.

I didn't. You implied that the only science that is useful is the one that materially creates something for us. And this is blatantly false. And you're right, it doesn't matter if a scientist is a creationist, evolutionist, Christian, Jew, Muslim, Hindu, Buddhist, or Satanist.

And evolution isn't a philosophy. It's a SCIENCE part of BIOLOGY. That's where you logic falters.

 

[Perfection]

Play by the rules Perfection, read the title and OP. I am NOT saying wheter evolution or creationism is true, I am saying that practically it doesn't matter, only philosophically it matters.

An epidemiological strategy is most certainly a practical application!

 

[Homie]

Let's see...

Human Genome
Virology
Immunology
Ethnical Divergence

Here, I found a good one:
http://www.wired.com/news/medtech/0,66198-0.html?tw=wn_story_page_prev2

How are any of those end results of science: namely products?
They are only attempts at proving evolution right, which is not what this is about.

Geeze, didn't I make it abundandly clear that this was not a Creation vs Evolution debate and that I wasn't asking for proof of evolution, but rather proof that the belief in evolution is necessary to conduct science.

 

[blackheart]

How are any of those end results of science: namely products?
They are only attempts at proving evolution right, which is not what this is about.

Geeze, didn't I make it abundandly clear that this was not a Creation vs Evolution debate and that I wasn't asking for proof of evolution, but rather proof that the belief in evolution is necessary to conduct science.

Homie, I already answered you, but let me answer you again. Quantum Physics, Calculus, Fractal Geometry, Nuclear physics, Geology, etc. don't even deal with evolution. Because evolution is in the field of BIOLOGY. And I'm sorry if you don't believe in the human genome or virology, but those are already established fields. I really don't see the point of the OP question if you aren't willing to accept the evidence shown or acknowledge the fact that not all science is geared towards practical applications or biology.

 

[Perfection]

How are any of those end results of science: namely products?

I can't think of any physical product that you an hold in your hand ATM, but certainly the changing attitudes of the medical community to issues like the proper usage of antibiotics is a "product" of an understanding of evolution

 

[WillJ]

Homie, seems to me like the word of the day should be "engineering," not science. Science is science regardless of whether or not it has practical applications.

And as Perfection said, evolutionary theory does have practical applications. (Although I'd imagine a lot of the details do not.)

Yet another proof that it is faith-based only, and religious in nature.

What the crap? 99% of modern mathematical research has no (known) practical application, and math is about as far away from faith-based as you can get.

 

[Homie]

Name for me one practical application of [Black hole Physics]! Do you think one couldn't have invented the car, the aeroplane, penicillin, raw oil destillation, nuclear power etc.. without the belief in [Black Hole Physics]?

I predict that a vast majority will vote that we need it to conduct science, but not one will be able to show how.
Yet another proof that [Black hole physics] are faith-based only, and religious in nature.


Theories need not have immediate and direct effects on invention and day to day life to be a part of the grander picture of the universe formed by use of the scientific method.

Exactly, that's my point. Its only use is to be an explanation for the origins of life on earth, a part of the grander picture of the universe, it has no practical implication for conducting science. Science is here to make stuff for us and make life easier, it is not here to help us philosophize.

 

[Souron]

Understanding of how viruses and bacteria mutate is a necessary backbone for medical research. Without such an understanding, we would not be able to understand when and why antibiotics don't work.

Edit: For example, without understanding of bacterial adaptation, we would not be able to treat people with AIDS.

 

[WillJ]

Science is here to make stuff for us and make life easier, it is not here to help us philosophize.

Again, what the crap? I suppose Einstein wasn't a scientist?

Yes, science IS partly here to help us philosophize. Many scientists would even say that's its highest purpose, not making shiny new products to boost the economy.

 

[Souron]

Exactly, that's my point. Its only use is to be an explanation for the origins of life on earth, a part of the grander picture of the universe, it has no practical implication for conducting science. Science is here to make stuff for us and make life easier, it is not here to help us philosophize.

Science is here to explain how the world works. Innovation is merely a byproduct of that knowledge.

 

[Homie]

Homie, seems to me like the word of the day should be "engineering," not science. Science is science regardless of whether or not it has practical applications.

And as Perfection said, evolutionary theory does have practical applications. (Although I'd imagine a lot of the details do not.) What the crap? 99% of modern mathematical research has no (known) practical application, and math is about as far away from faith-based as you can get.

WHat? Math sure has practical implications, without math one cannot conduct any of the other sciences, and it would be pretty hard to make the product calculator without understanding math

blackheart, Biology has practical implications, I believe making pharmaceuticals builds on (parts of) biology.

Black holes and their disputed existance have no practical implication today, but if we manage to build star ships we might want to know if black holes exist, because you don't want to be sucked into one of those things

 

[Eran of Arcadia]

What practical implications do fractals have? They are part of math as much as arithmetic.

We have already mentioned anything involved with genetics. You seem not to consider that to count, so maybe I will ask you what practical implications Creations science has.