Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
2 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 13/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Should creationists be able to benefit from technologies from evolutionary biology?
Kevin
Inactive Member


Message 31 of 35 (174163)
01-05-2005 3:33 PM
Reply to: Message 26 by Quetzal
01-03-2005 9:41 AM


oops
Sorry, i posted that right when the site was being updated and I kept on getting an error message. Didn't think any of my posts had been received.

Morality is temporary, wisdom is permanent

This message is a reply to:
 Message 26 by Quetzal, posted 01-03-2005 9:41 AM Quetzal has not replied

  
Abshalom
Inactive Member


Message 32 of 35 (174166)
01-05-2005 3:42 PM


Opinions Change in the Face of Death
I can only answer the original question from an atheist's point of view by saying that when faced with impending death, I was willing to accept assistance from whatever sources presented an opportunity. For me this included welcoming prayers on my behalf by well-meaning persons of faith.
Therefore, I must assume that creationists and others who do not "believe" in science, stem cell research, etc., might welcome the unbridled application of such medical benefits as are available them in the face of death (the Great Equalizer).
Besides, I think it would be immoral to withhold the benefits of medical science from a patient simply based upon that patient's previously stated beliefs which in many cases are a lot of blarny in the first place.

  
Kevin
Inactive Member


Message 33 of 35 (174170)
01-05-2005 3:48 PM
Reply to: Message 28 by jokun
01-05-2005 9:33 AM


Re: It does conflict
Of course it has to do with the topic.
A medical doctor needs to understand evolution if he or she is going to prescribe antibiotics to a patient.
A drug researcher needs to understand evolution to know where to find new antibiotics in nature.
If the business person knew how evolution worked then they would probably not cut down some rain forests to make a new plantation or ranch because they would understand that this area is one of the most competative areas on earth and thus where most antibiotics are created.

Morality is temporary, wisdom is permanent

This message is a reply to:
 Message 28 by jokun, posted 01-05-2005 9:33 AM jokun has not replied

  
Loudmouth
Inactive Member


Message 34 of 35 (174189)
01-05-2005 4:58 PM
Reply to: Message 30 by Kevin
01-05-2005 3:32 PM


quote:
And I though I new how to party! The key is that he was allergic to bee stings but found a way to skip the adrenalin shots by using electric shocks. Do you know what an allergy is? It is caused by an overreactive immunce system.
Do you know what happens when people receive a large electrical shock? They release adrenalin. My guess is that the farmer is releasing endogenous adrenalin instead of using exogenous adrenalin. The adrenalin counteracts the constriction in the airways and in the vascular system caused by the sudden release of cytokines induced by the toxins in the bee sting.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 30 by Kevin, posted 01-05-2005 3:32 PM Kevin has not replied

  
Loudmouth
Inactive Member


Message 35 of 35 (174191)
01-05-2005 5:08 PM


Using Unethical Research
My lab group sits through ethical research training annually. We go over all of the rules, but even more intriguing is indepth study of specific cases. One such case that we cover each year are the studies done by Nazi doctors on Jewish prisoners. In those studies, the Nazis allowed prisoners to die of hypothermia in order to study the effectiveness of particular clothing or conditions to prevent hypothermia. This is, of course, very unethical. However, does this mean that we shouldn't use the data? According to the guidelines that govern ethical research in the US, the data can and should be used. In fact, it is actually considered unethical to not use the data if it pertains to your area of study. Don't get me wrong, this in no way condones unethical research.
So even within secular, evolutionist research the use of data derived through unethical practices is used. In the same way, I would expect creationists to use advances derived through evolutionary biology in the same way, and I wouldn't find it hypocritical. If something works, it works. If the methodology used to derive further technology is ethical, even if it is considered blasphemous by some, should not stop people from using it.
However, I would argue against removing evolution as a tool for researching disease. So far, comparative genomics has been a very useful tool for discovering the cause of many genetic diseases. Again, I do not feel that creationists would be hypocritical for wanting this type of research to continue. First and foremost, creationists want the suffering of people to be abated as much as any evolutionists, so if it works keep using it.

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024