Where are the scientific breakthroughs due to evolution? Dr. Marc Kirschner, chair of the Department of Systems Biology, Harvard Medical School, stated: “In fact, over the last 100 years, almost all of biology has proceeded independent of evolution, except evolutionary biology itself. Molecular biology, biochemistry, physiology, have not taken evolution into account at all.”9 Dr. Skell wrote, “It is our knowledge of how these organisms actually operate, not speculations about how they may have arisen millions of years ago, that is essential to doctors, veterinarians, farmers ….”10 Evolution actually hinders medical discovery.11 Then why do schools and universities teach evolution so dogmatically, stealing time from experi-mental biology that so benefits humankind? creation.com/science#relevance (Sourced from 15 Questions for Evolutionists)
Evolutionists claim evolution is science. Good science leads to discoveries and inventions. Can evolution lay claim to being responsible for any scientific breakthroughs? Evolutionists claim evolution is at the center of biology. It is true biology is at the center of medicine, but does evolution play any part in discoveries concerning medicine? Does the hypothetical evolution of fish to amphibians to reptiles to mammals actually have anything to do with how a human body operates and responds to medications today? Does believing a dinosaur evolved into a bird advance the study of today’s molecular biologists understanding of operational microbiology? How?
Evolutionist, and the 2005 chair of the Department of Systems Biology at Harvard Medical School, Dr. Marc Kirschner is quoted in the Boston Globe, “In fact, over the last 100 years, almost all of biology has proceeded independent of evolution, except evolutionary biology itself. Molecular biology, biochemistry, physiology, have not taken evolution into account at all.”
Tell me, how is it evolution has contributed to biology when such a learned evolutionist states as a matter of fact that almost all of biology has proceeded independent of evolution? How can evolution be central to biology when Dr. Kirschner stated, “Molecular biology, biochemistry, physiology, have not taken evolution into account at all”?
It is interesting that the only “biology” the esteemed Dr. Kirschner says evolution contributed to is evolutionary biology. Basically, evolution only contributes to itself, and nothing else. Is evolution really science?
As if this was not bad enough for evolution (and the adherents to evolution), Dr. Skell tells us not only that knowledge of evolution did not help in any advancement, but to the contrary, evolution actually hinders medical discovery.
So evolutionists, why do schools and universities teach evolution so dogmatically, stealing time from experimental biology that so benefits humankind? Why do evolutionists take legitimate discoveries from experimental and operational molecular biology, biochemistry and physiology and then deceitfully dress them up in evolutionary garb to deceive the public?
Where exactly are the breakthroughs brought about because of molecules-to-microbiologist evolution? How is it that evolution is actually responsible for these breakthroughs you desire to claim?
9 As quoted in the Boston Globe, 23 October 2005.
10 Skell, P.S., The Dangers Of Overselling Evolution; Focusing on Darwin and his theory doesn't further scientific progress, Forbes magazine, 23 Feb 2009; http://www.forbes.com/2009/02/23/evolution-creation-debate-biology-opinions-contributors_darwin.html.
11 E.g. Krehbel, M., Railroad wants monkey off its back, Creation 16(4):20–22, 1994; creation.com/monkey_back