"but if you can name one useful invention that needed any Darwin imput, do say."

You assume that each scientific discipline works in complete isolation, and that is most certainly not the case. Any research these days is multi-disciplinary to a certain degree, and all rely on the same principles. The chemistry behind the creation of new materials such as graphene is based on the same fundamental principles that allow us to understand the water cycle, how bones fossilise, how to make the glass on your iPhone, the changes in composition of magma due to pressure and temperature etc.

All science is interconnected; you can deny evolution until you're blue in the face but by denying evolution you're also essentially denying science itself; we know about evolution because of chemistry, biology, physics, maths, statistics and the myriad of other disciplines that make up science.

And therein lies the point. Fundamentalists like Pete are science deniers. Despite the fact they are surrounded by things that science has made possible (God did not invent your computer, iPad or paracetamol) they refuse to entertain it's validity or even integrity. They can't understand it's interconnectedness or even the very nature of scientific enquiry.