These evolving codes have intelligent designers.
Take off your blinders.
No, actually, they don't. Please correct your ignorance. "These evolving codes" begin totally at random, and then randomly explore problem space while the alleged "intelligent designers" of the "codes" are out eating dinner.
Furthermore, the "evolving codes" can solve problems that even the *programmers* don't know how to solve. So where and how exactly did the "intelligent designers" put in the "intelligence" to solve the problem when THEY DIDN'T HAVE THAT INTELLIGENCE THEMSELVES?
Ponder that one for a while.
Look, I know what you're trying to say, but you're quite simply way off base. Tell me: If I use a telescope to examine a distant moon of Jupiter, does that mean that it's impossible for the moon to circle its planet because I used "intelligent design" to make the telescope I'm using gather data? If I build a wooden ramp to study how objects roll downhill, does that mean that no objects can roll down hills (or no hills can exist) without the kind of "intelligent design" I put into setting up the ramp for the experiment? This is *exactly* the kind of nonsense that anti-evolutionists spew when they try to hand-wave away the results of evolutionary algorithms by whining about how someone used their "intelligent design" to set up the experiment and monitor it as it runs (and runs BY ITSELF, I repeat again).
It's hogwash. I've *DONE* genetic algorithms. I *know* that I constructed the "experiment" in a way that precludes me "putting" the solution into the system, in just the same way that any good experimenter knows how to isolate the thing he's testing from his own interference. And they've usually come up with results that surprised even *me*, because not even *I* had the "intelligence" which the evolutionary processes CAME UP WITH ON THEIR OWN.
Honestly, you *don't* know how these things work, because you're frantically looking for *excuses* for why you think you shouldn't have to actually learn about them, instead of just *reading* the material and learning *from* it. It's pathetic, frankly, but I've come to expect it from anti-evolutionists. (That's how they *stay* anti-evolutionists, by hiding from the actual topic and the evidence for it.)
Take off your blinders.
Oh, the irony...