Evolutionary Thoery is about as useful as an art museum

[RandomPoster]

I am not a Creationist or even a Christian. I simply don't see the importance of studying Evolution. There are a lot of things people find interesting. Heck, some people find impressionist paintings interesting. That doesn't make them useful. I can not fathom any purpose of math and science other than to serve as a foundation for technological innovation. I do not see how Evolution is contributing much in terms of better cars, planes, computers, firearms, bombs, rockets, etc.

Not one penny of taxpayer money should go towards art, music, or other non-productive fields. I have never bought a painting or a music album. I am not missing out on anything. Most music annoys me and realism is the only legitimate form of art.

Of course, evolutionary science is not a detriment to society like the arts and humanities are. If we got rid of the arts and humanities, we would all be better off. They are poisonous to us as a species. For example, we spend huge amounts of money researching and trying to treat people with psychological illnesses when simply rounding them up and institutionalizing them into concentrated populations is actually much more effective at protecting society at a lower cost.

 

[forkup]

I am not a Creationist or even a Christian. I simply don't see the importance of studying Evolution. There are a lot of things people find interesting. Heck, some people find impressionist paintings interesting. That doesn't make them useful. I can not fathom any purpose of math and science other than to serve as a foundation for technological innovation. I do not see how Evolution is contributing much in terms of better cars, planes, computers, firearms, bombs, rockets, etc.

Not one penny of taxpayer money should go towards art, music, or other non-productive fields. I have never bought a painting or a music album. I am not missing out on anything. Most music annoys me and realism is the only legitimate form of art.

Of course, evolutionary science is not a detriment to society like the arts and humanities are. If we got rid of the arts and humanities, we would all be better off. They are poisonous to us as a species. For example, we spend huge amounts of money researching and trying to treat people with psychological illnesses when simply rounding them up and institutionalizing them into concentrated populations is actually much more effective at protecting society at a lower cost.

What you are saying is that it is unimportant to study where we come from. It is unimportant where we're going. Couple of things, almost all science has a use outside the actual knowledge and just because you don't have an immediate use for it doesn't mean it doesn't get one. For instance evolution is not only used in biology, but also in computer science, a thoroughly practical application.Evolutionary computation - Wikipedia
Point is if mankind wouldn't pursue science for science sake all progress would stop.
Secondly understanding who we are should be a fundamental question for anybody who has an ounce of curiosity.

 

[aaronleland]

Science is for uppity communists.

 

[koshergrl]

Science is for uppity communists.

Most of the science that lefties prate is *science*.

 

[ScienceRocks]

So if you idiots have your way we'll be like Saudi Arabia or some other religious fascist society that doesn't study science.

This is sick shit.

 

[Peach]

Music and art predate writing, there is value in the past, present and future. Many theories are interesting, many should be studied, if you choose not to, forego the experience.

 

[BulletProof]

The reason the Creation vs. Evolution debate can't be resolved is because there's no practical consequence to believing either, no matter how much some Evolutionists idiotically insist that you can't do, or even wouldn't want to do, science without believing Evolution.

 

[ScienceRocks]

The reason the Creation vs. Evolution debate can't be resolved is because there's no practical consequence to believing either, no matter how much some Evolutionists idiotically insist that you can't do, or even wouldn't want to do, science without believing Evolution.

]
Are you retarded are something? The entire fossil record supports evolution. It isn't a straight line but we can clearly see hominid evolutionary change from 8 million years ago on down to our current species. Changes in skull shape, changes in pelvis structure, etc.

What do you have for God? Nothing!

We can follow the development of the dinosaurs from 220 million years ago all the way through their development. Dinosaurs got bigger because they had a bit of a arms race and there was plenty of food on this planet. Evolution!!!Plant eaters need to be big enough to defend themselves and tall enough to get the leafs off the trees. This is proven based on the fossil record.

We can do the same for all animals on this planet. You must not follow science at all if you believe evolution isn't supported with real research that has proven to be solid.

Comparing the two as equal makes you look uneducated.

 

[forkup]

The reason the Creation vs. Evolution debate can't be resolved is because there's no practical consequence to believing either, no matter how much some Evolutionists idiotically insist that you can't do, or even wouldn't want to do, science without believing Evolution.

Evolutionary computation - Wikipedia Just because people like you don't believe in it, doesn't mean the scientists don't. And they do use evolution for practical purposes. Can Creationism claim the same? And btw not believing in evolution means you have to not believe in genetics, biology, math, chemistry, physics, archaeology, anthropology and geology. Every one of these sciences can proof evolution.

 

[MarkDuffy]

Claim CA215:
The theory of evolution is useless, without practical application.

CA215: Practical uses of evolution.

 

[BulletProof]

Evolutionary computation - Wikipedia Just because people like you don't believe in it, doesn't mean the scientists don't. And they do use evolution for practical purposes. Can Creationism claim the same? And btw not believing in evolution means you have to not believe in genetics, biology, math, chemistry, physics, archaeology, anthropology and geology. Every one of these sciences can proof evolution.

I'm 100% confidant that "evolutionary computation" is really no support for the Theory of Evolution, and vice-versa. And, you haven't lifted a finger to show otherwise. Claiming not believing in Evolution means not believing in genetics, math, etc. just shows you to be an @sshole.

There is no practical benefit to believing Evolution, and you have only blatantly bullsh1ted.

 

[ScienceRocks]

Another case of evolution is the horse!

See the clear path from small to bigger? Evolution!

 

[ScienceRocks]

Evolutionary computation - Wikipedia Just because people like you don't believe in it, doesn't mean the scientists don't. And they do use evolution for practical purposes. Can Creationism claim the same? And btw not believing in evolution means you have to not believe in genetics, biology, math, chemistry, physics, archaeology, anthropology and geology. Every one of these sciences can proof evolution.

I'm 100% confidant that "evolutionary computation" is really no support for the Theory of Evolution, and vice-versa. And, you haven't lifted a finger to show otherwise. Claiming not believing in Evolution means not believing in genetics, math, etc. just shows you to be an @sshole.

There is no practical benefit to believing Evolution, and you have only blatantly bullsh1ted.

You don't believe in reality.

 

[BulletProof]

Another case of evolution is the horse!

See the clear path from small to bigger? Evolution!

What's the practical difference between believing the modern horse evolved form eohippus and believing that the chart just contains two or three distinct but evolutionary unrelated species arranged in an order to bear a resemblance to Evolution? And, you do know those drawings of the animals, apart from the modern horse, is from some artist's imagination? Why not draw a longer mane on plohippus? Because the artist wants to fudge the data.

 

[ScienceRocks]

Human evolution...See the changes in skulls and other adaptions?

What really proves evolution is the reality that each new development gets us closer to current man.

 

[ScienceRocks]

So yes, lets throw away hundreds of years of science because some asshole doesn't want to think. Dumb.

 

[MarkDuffy]

Evolution is part of basic science. It does not need to have practical applications. Its purpose is to explain history of life on earth.

 

[forkup]

Evolutionary computation - Wikipedia Just because people like you don't believe in it, doesn't mean the scientists don't. And they do use evolution for practical purposes. Can Creationism claim the same? And btw not believing in evolution means you have to not believe in genetics, biology, math, chemistry, physics, archaeology, anthropology and geology. Every one of these sciences can proof evolution.

I'm 100% confidant that "evolutionary computation" is really no support for the Theory of Evolution, and vice-versa. And, you haven't lifted a finger to show otherwise. Claiming not believing in Evolution means not believing in genetics, math, etc. just shows you to be an @sshole.

There is no practical benefit to believing Evolution, and you have only blatantly bullsh1ted.

So computer scientists say they base something on the theory of evolution, but you are 100 percent confident it doesn't support it? A strong claim that is claiming the exact opposite of those who developed it. This, of course is the problem with discussing something with a creationist. You feel that your faith has the same power as facts. As such you don't feel at all compelled to come out with a reasoned argument, you believe and that's that. Just for kicks I'll give you some of the things you need to reject to make your viewpoint valid. Radiometric dating can be used to establish a timeline for sediments where a fossil is found. It flies completely against the book of genesis It's founded on nuclear physics, basic mathematics ( half lives), archeology and geology ( to predict were certain fossils are found). Vestigial organs, which is straight up biology. DNA proves all living things common ancestry. This too is corroborated by fossils. Etc, etc.

 

[BulletProof]

Human evolution...See the changes in skulls and other adaptions?

What really proves evolution is the reality that each new development gets us closer to current man.

What I said in post #14 applies here. Either respond that post, or pretend I posted similar comments to your post. Your pictures prove nothing, least of all practical value for believing Evolution.

 

[ScienceRocks]

What's funny is you really do believe that a god would make dozens(or many dozens) of past species of walking apes with some trees branches failing and some moving forward towards the current form of man. This is what the fossil record shows and what such a god would need to have done. Unlikely I'd say. Evolution makes far more sense.