Joined: Oct. 2012
|Quote (JohnW @ Nov. 20 2012,00:45)|
|Quote (GaryGaulin @ Nov. 19 2012,15:28)|
|Quote (JohnW @ Nov. 19 2012,17:09)|
|Gary, until you've shown that the natural world - not your code - works this way, this is just an assertion.|
So was the model/theory of Charles Darwin and any other theorist who ever lived.
Your argument is still irrelevant.
Charles Darwin presented evidence. Evidence from the natural world. And he showed how his theory explained that evidence. And he, and subsequent scientists, found new evidence which further supported the theory, and failed to find any evidence which contradicted it.
It's called science, Gary. You may have heard of it.
Meanwhile, what have you done? Written a VB program. Asserted, without showing evidence and without engaging real-world data in any way, that this program supports, even proves, your notion that molecules are intelligent. That's it.
It's like claiming that World of Warcraft proves the existence of magic.
As earlier explained and linked to, the big-wigs of his day were suggesting Charles Darwin was a drunken bum who needs help for his mental condition. His theory was disgraced out of science. His only friend (Thomas Huxley) later become a hero, because of Charles having been so scientifically friendless. It took 30 years for the "scientific community" to even care about him or his theory. And considering how he could not describe a testable mechanism (DNA) you would have right away joined the science by consensus, chorus of insults.
You do not even know your science history. As a result, you were doomed to repeat it.
The theory of intelligent design holds that certain features of the universe and of living things are best explained by an intelligent cause, not an undirected process such as natural selection.