@Ionus,
Quote:
I repeat: name one discovery that needed the theory of evolution for it to be discovered
That's not what you said. You are trying to weasel over a bit to eliminate ANY necessity.
The development of yearly drugs and understanding resistance of organisms to diseases may be discovered by DUMB LUCK, but using the theory of nat selection has almost unilaterally directed the WAY in which such study and drug development or handling of sick organisms, proceeds.
We got from San Francisco to Sydney a century and a half ago, but e do it much more quickly and safely now.
Your statement that Germ Theory predates evolution, while correct, misses the point that Bacteriology isn't all about disease.
You seem to think that the very discovery of common ancestors and the parent species was able to be completely done without
considering the evolution of the clades in which the "cat" members reside?
The use of evolutionary development of forams is critical to oil and gas exploration (today). Back in the old days, it was a manner of hit or miss "Saturation drilling". We don't do that any more. Energy exploration is a very precise science that is the result of interdisciplinary use of many sciences INCLUDING evolutionary thinking.
No, there are many applications of evolutionary bioscience within many disciplines. I never said that they wouldn't have occurred without it, dumb luck could get you somewhere near the answer but not in any planned fashion,
but these applications do benefit from knowing the mechanisms defined by nat selection.
Quote:
Evolution that can be seen in a life time is not a proof of evolution over millions of years
why not? If we can trace a change in a genome over a short period of time (OUR lifetime is many many thousand times certain insect lives, or 400 times a rats life.
Fixing a new gene in a population occurs anywhere from 200 to 1000 generations and can result in the development of pluralistic solutions well within our lives.
We are quite fortunate(for one example) in having been able to see the pluralistic "divergence" among several species of anadromous fish that had been "trapped" behind dams built in colonial times along New England Rivers. Macroevolution of daughter species are able to be seen from a single parent population thatwas stuck behind these dams about 300 years ago. (That's short enough to result in the appearance of these new species that are defined by special adaptive mechanisms that have resulted in new phenotypic forms.
I was curious why you defined evolution up front of your post. Are you afraid that no one but you seems to understand the concept?
Try not to command a discussion with obvious gunga style tricks, youll be found out rather quickly that maybe youre not as genuine as you appear.