Relevancy

     A scientific endeavor is relevant if it directly or indirectly benefits man. The principles of accountability and relevancy are closely linked. Relevant sciences such as mathematics, physics and chemistry are accountable in that the truth of all axioms are born out in the practical world in which we live. A subject that is less relevant to daily life, such as the study of black holes, has less accountability. This is because any error of conclusions does not directly impact our lives.

     It is commonly stated that evolution is the foundation of modern biology.  This is illusory.  The study of evolution over the past 160 years has resulted in the construction of an  elaborate paradigm of thinking.  Only evolutionary biology is founded on evolution.  The beliefs of evolution are irrelevant to experimental biology. 

      Medical research is intensively peer-reviewed, because of its relevancy to daily life. In contrast, the theory of evolution is irrelevant to experimental biology. Despite countless hundreds of thousands of hours of research into evolution, its study has not resulted in any benefit to man's understanding of science. This is because scientific knowledge of biology is gained by studying living organisms and their functionality, not by speculation as to how they originated.

     The study of evolution is a field of research confined almost exclusively to academia, in an environment where secular thinking is revered. The only purpose in studying evolution is academic interest.

     The theory of evolution has not aided in man's understanding of genetics or general biology in any way. No new inroads have been forged in the quest to cure diseases that hinge on the doctrine of continuity of species. Acceptance of evolution has failed to provide new insights into the genetic code. It has not facilitated the development of new techniques in the selective breeding of plants. It has not contributed to the DNA mapping of any species. It has not been successful at predicting new scientific truths yet to be discovered. Its study has not added one iota of new information to science as we know it today. On the contrary, the theory of evolution is continually re-adjusted to fit with more and more discoveries that contradict its precepts.

       Because evolutionary perspectives can be sited to account for many observations of nature, such speculations do not indicate that evolution is necessary in understanding scientific mechanisms. This is not aiding man's understanding of the natural world, but merely represents conformity to a restricted paradigm of thinking. One can successfully practice experimental biology believing in false concepts of biology.  Ancient sailors who believed the earth was flat and that the sun revolved around the earth successfully navigated across oceans based on that paradigm.  The fact that most biologists believe in evolution does not validate evolution, because no experiments in biology rely on the validity of evolution. All observations in biology are entirely consistent with intelligent design.

     





Dr Marc Kirschner, chairman of the Department of Systems Biology at Harvard Medical School, noted:


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.



     




Dr. Louis Bounoure, a highly respected French biologist, issued this stinging commentary,


"Evolution is a fairy tale for grown-ups. This theory has helped nothing in the progress of science. It is useless."


     Because the theory of evolution is irrelevant to science, it carries with it almost no accountability in terms of a scientific theory. As a result, its proponents are free to abandon all standards of scientific investigation in an effort to promote a worldview.