Joined: July 2006
hahah, Gordon's got a snit on too
Again, I have pointed out that
(a) the most natural interpretation of Mr Dawkins’ actual words — cf the above excerpt from BW if you do not care to follow the link — is partitioned search and explicit latching. MORE TOT HE POINT, THEY SHOW THAT HE UNDERTOOK PROXIMITY-BASED TARGETTED SEARCH WITH REWARD OF NON-FUNCTIONALITY. (That is Weasel is fundamentally flawed and demonstrably rhetorically seriously misleading.)
(b) other readings are possible, and it is demonstrated — not just speculation — that with suitable filters and parameter tuning, Weasel programs can implicitly latch.
( c) on the balance of the evidence of statements, printed runs and whatnot, the published runs of 1986 seem to have implicitly latched.
(d) Quasi-patching with rare reversions is also possible.
(e) far from latching behaviour is also possible.
All of this I have stated, and as necessary, shown.
So, why are you re-stating what I have said, with emphases and wording that make it seem that I am in the wrong to say such? [You can write type d or e versions of Weasel to your heart's content. That will not change the natural reading of Mr Dawkins' words, circa 1986, and it will not change the fact that the runs he published at that time show behaviour that is best explained as latched. the issue is how. Explicit latching is the easiest way, but implicit quasi-latching is also possible. And, far-from latched versions of Weasel are irrelevant to the status as at 1986, INCLUDING the 1987 BBC Horizon videotaped runs.]
Please, recheck yourself on cognitive dissonance again. Recall, it its the same Dawkins who said that those who disagree with his evolutionary materialism — especially if they happen to be “Creationists” — are ignorant, stupid, insane or wicked.
Do I need to spell that out:
GEM of TKI
Then follows up with
|PS: Could you kindly provide us with a credible copy of the actual program or algorithm for the Weasel runs as published circa 1986? [If you cannot, given your declaration that >> Dawkins WEASEL algorithm does not specify nor require a latching mechanism and that apparent latching behaviour is simply an expected result when only observing the fittest member of each generation >> then my remarks above and in the again linked are doubly underscored.]|
Um, every copy of the Blind Watchmaker comes with a "credible copy of the actual program or algorithm". Where do you suppose all those people who've recreated it using the description in the book got the information from Gordon?
I also mentioned that He'd have to give me a thorough explanation as to *why* I must "eat human babies".
if there are even critical flaws in Gauger’s work, the evo mat narrative cannot stand