In a direct comparison between Creation Science and evolutionary biology, which has more potential…?

Question

…to provide beneficial technology or benefits in general to humanity’s progress?

Answer 1

So called "Creation Science" has no predictive power whatsoever. It only seeks to explain the past in a way consistent with the Bible, and provides no theory from which knowledge of biology or medicine could be improved.

Evolutionary biology is being used every day to make predictions and guide research to advance knowledge.
--- edit ---
I can't believe creationists are still repeating the "Evolution denies the 2nd law of thermodynamics" propaganda. Can you guys stop getting ALL of your information from other propagandists, and actually learn some real science?
Please at least read this link:
http://talkorigins.org/indexcc/CF/CF001.html
It is the very first creation claim that is rebutted on the Talk Origins Index to Creationist Claims.

Answer 2

Evolutionary biology has more to do with genetics than our origins. That in no way conflicts with creationism. We are only opposed to the idea that evolution has the ability to create. That is what we say is bad science. So either have the same potential for technological progress.

Answer 3

they got here upon that the IRS won't purchase the tale that a creation museum is a church and not subject to any taxes. humorous how creationism is technological expertise while they choose to get it into faculties and a church while Hovind does not choose to pay taxes. by means of how, " I actual have a usual perception in the word of God....I learn the Bible on a daily basis" says genuinely not something approximately the two creationism or a literal interpretation. It takes a creationist to work out what isn't there. EDIT: Um, Elias, did you seize the area of the "Y chromosome Adam" which says he lived hundreds of years earlier the meant date of creation? i don't think of so. I additionally do not think of you grasped the bit approximately how "mitochondrial Eve" lived tens of hundreds of years earlier the male MRCA, and it style of feels specific which you probably did not seize the area approximately how "maximum present consumer-friendly ancestor" does not recommend that there have been no different human men around on the time.

Answer 4

Evolutionary biology for sure has more potential to benefit mankind. To study creationism, you only need to study one book. To study evolution is all its multiplicity, you need to study many many books. That should clue you into which theory contains more knowledge and potential.

Answer 5

For an introduction to the practical applictions of evolutionary theory see: http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CA/CA215.html

So-called "Creation science", on the other hand, has not produced a single beneficial technological application.

It's an ideology designed to protect a religious viewpoint, not a science.

Answer 6

I would probably assume Creation Science. I think that fossils play a direct role in both perspectives, but favor creation due to none of the fossils are in any transition phase.

Answer 7

Creation science supposedly has wonderful benefits, that people might acquire once they are dead. Why compare what you can have for certain while we are alive with what might possibly happen after death? Ask a cretin 'scientist'.

Answer 8

Creationism isn't science. It's religious dogma. The only thing it'll provide is ignorance and stupidity.

Answer 9

evolution has been a scientific FACT for 300 years...the only ones not accepting this are XTians. They'd prefer to believe a book written by men, incorrectly translated by men and incorrectly interpreted by men...

Answer 10

Evolution is not a science Evolution defies mathematical probability. Evolution defies laws of physics (second law of thermodynamics.)

Evolution claims, random change & natural selection make simple things spontaneously transform into more complex things without recourse to intelligent design. Chance and random changes simply do not produce higher levels of organization & complexity.