One of the questions I have dived into several times discusses the impracticality of Creationism. More specifically the question I ask is what part of any scientific theory, or scientific advancement uses Creationism? To date the answer to that question has been silence, and it continues to be silence. No one has been able to point to anything that shows an actual use of Creationism in science.
The best some have tried to do is claim credit for some scientific advancement because the scientist who made the breakthrough was a theist of one form or another. My response to that is usually "So what!" Just because Newton believed in God, show me where God had a hand in Newton's theories? Show me the part of any theory where you identify and categorize the actions on any particular deity? No one has been able to, not once!
So since Creationism is pretty much useless, then Creationists must show that Evolution is also useless. After all, isn't it logical to infer that if evolution is useless, then Creationism must be the only answer there is? I know, not to me, and not to anyone with a working brain. Even if you manage to convince someone that Evolution is useless, that doesn't automatically imply that Creationism suddenly has value.
But you know they have to try, and one of my favorite Creationists, the homophobic and Biblical-revisionist - little kennie ham - had one of his pet 'scientists' give it a go. He's tried it before, remember just last year it was "A Renowned Creation Scientist, Inventor of MRI". Of course this was nothing but an example of a theist who managed to develop some very cutting edge science regardless of his religious beliefs. As usual, no one can point to any part of the theories behind magnetic imaging and say "and here is where God did such-and-such." But since he is a Creationists, little kennie uses him as a poster-boy for Creation Science.
I will repeat something I have said over and over again. Being a Creationist doesn't mean you cannot think . . . it's just that being a Creationist, most tend not to think, particular when someone like little kennie is telling you that thinking certain things goes against his religious beliefs. Well, this time kennie has a pet medical doctor who makes this claim: "Evolution Has "Absolutely No Effect" on Medical Practice". To which I can only reply "Bullshit!"
Apparently Tommy Mitchell has forgotten much of what he learned in preparation for his medical career. Many of the medicines and treatments he used were tested out on various animals. Why is that? It's because they react much in the same way humans do. Why would that be? Of course the Creationist would say that maybe they were placed on this Earth for the purpose of medical testing. But the evidence shows that such testing works because of the evolutionary relationship we have with those animals. Here is a quote from little kennie that he says he got from Dr. Tommy:
"When Grandma’s in the ICU and her kidneys are not working, you’re not sitting there thinking, “Well, her kidney’s evolved.” No, you just care that Grandma’s kidneys don’t work, and you want them to work again. So, operationally, evolution had zero effect on anything I did as a physician"
How about pesticide/drug resistance? Does Creationism have an answer why individuals and groups develop a resistance to certain pesticides/medications over time? Evolution explains it quite handily and that is something medical research doctors take into account regularly. But I guess Tommy wasn't one of those.
"Actually, taking care of Grandma today in the hospital has nothing to do with accepting evolution"