Artificial Life Experiments Show How Complex Functions Can Evolve

NSF ^ | May 8, 2003 | Staff

[AndrewC]

it's not at all clear what you would propose to replace those portions of current theory that you seem to object to.

No, it may not be clear who would replace Yogi Berra on the pitching mound. But it would be clear that Yogi does not belong there.

[AndrewC]

You did not bear good witness. You called their work nothing and cited deliberately misleading information in favor of your position.

That is a either a lie or insensate raving. I did not call their work nothing. I stated this--

You stated nothing about the operation of anything. All you stated was your opinion. The 17 transistor circuit does exactly what and how? All we have is a statement in a magazine that the circuit performs better than a 9 transistor circuit, both diagrammed in the article. The 9 transistor circuit is actually a modification of the patented circuit which consists of 5 transistors and 4 diodes and no resistors. It has a measured performance on display with the patent. There is no such evidence for the 17 transistor kludge. The specifications are for the circuit to be compact and work to the gigahertz range. There is no evidence that the 17 transistor circuit can achieve those specs.

You are long on words and short on facts. I talked about the patented circuit and the data available to those who would look.

[Right Wing Professor]

Is this how Physicist and Right Wing Professor feel when they come up against creationists who try to argue on the topics of physics?

What depresses me is when, having debunked the second law argument about evolution for the fifth or sixth time, as clearly as I can, it gets repeated yet again. And it depresses me that the creationists who know better will never correct their own side. When I've posted something that turned out to be wrong or inaccurate, I've been corrected by evolutionists, most of whom seem to have a concern for the truth. Never seen that on the other side.

[general_re]

So far, Yogi's the only one on the roster. If you would like to add another pitcher to the lineup card, we're all interested to know who....

[PatrickHenry]

Never seen that on the other side.

Never will. When someone starts out with a garbled pile of nonsense (e.g. creationism) labeled "The Truth!", no thought is required. Anything -- anything at all -- that purports to conflict with it is Evil, and must be oppposed. That's all there is to it. Corrections? Not possible. Debate? Ridiculous.

[AndrewC]

If you would like to add another pitcher to the lineup card, we're all interested to know who....

Isn't it apparent there is a lockout?

[AndrewC]

See the post just prior to my previous reply.

[nmh]

The Judeo Christian God has always existed. Again your problem is one of arrogance. Simply because you can't comprehend that makes that statement unbelievable to you. Yet, you will completely ignore that NO evidence supports evolution and willingly embrace that. Now you are practically peeing yourself over a rigged computer program that simulates ARTIFICAL life. What a hoot you are! You chose to believe in fantasy and the surreal.

[general_re]

Nevermind them - not having a pitcher isn't an option, so until a better one comes along, we're kind of stuck with the Yogster, despite his flaws. Got anyone in mind?

[js1138]

post 1003 placemarker. The lyrics I posted from Monty Python cover this rather well.

[AndrewC]

Got anyone in mind?

You should have some idea, since you know I like Shapiro. But this is turning into what I think. I am not in the business of emulating Darwin. I merely have comments on evidence presented to me. So far on this thread the evidence for the assertions is diaphanous. So I await something of substance.

[f.Christian]

Artificial life -- clones ... wind up -- knock offs --- toys for tots !

Must be sat morn (( cartoons )) always for you !

[js1138]

Re: found that weekly synagogue- or churchgoers experienced a 28% lower mortality rate than those attending less regularly

I'm curious about what that 28 percent lower rate means in real life. Perhaps it means non-churchgoers are already hospitalized and can't attend, or perhaps it means churchgoers engage in fewer risky or unhealthful activities.

Sort of like the reason minivans are among the safest vehicles.

[AndrewC]

Perhaps it means non-churchgoers are already hospitalized and can't attend, or perhaps it means churchgoers engage in fewer risky or unhealthful activities.

Ah, I see! Churchgoers are less likely to be hospitalized and they don't teach things in church.

[js1138]

Perhaps that's because thay have no beliefs? We have been trying to get some of the Creationists to just state simple things such as: how old do they believe the earth to be. The Kefauver Committee got more responses.

Do you now or have you ever believed that the current level of genetic diversity within species is consistent with all living creatures being descended from one or seven pairs of their kind, within historic time?

How's that for a question, Senator?

[f.Christian]

Atheism ...

Main Entry: blas·phe·my
Pronunciation: 'blas-f&-mE
Function: noun
Inflected Form(s): plural -mies
Date: 13th century
1 a : the act of insulting or showing contempt or lack of reverence for God b : the act of claiming the attributes of deity
2 : irreverence toward something considered sacred or inviolable

[js1138]

Your level of reading miscomprehension is amazing. How about starting over with what I said and what I intended, not what you wish I had said. I think that if it is true that churchgoers are longer lived than non-churchgoers (not exactly what is being claimed, but I'll accept it for the moment) there are numerous possible reasons. The most likely is that churchgoers have fewer risky and unhealthy habits.

[AndrewC]

The most likely is that churchgoers have fewer risky and unhealthy habits.

And I answered you(in a round about way), Why would that be?

[CobaltBlue]

I thought you said the thread is about programming. It appears you do want to talk about religion but only on your terms.

[donh]

If you mean 5 miles deeper than at present, that's way wrong. Ice caps are 1 to 2 miles deep, at most. Look at a globe and figure it out for yourself. There's at, best, about 200 feet to go if we lose all the remaining ice on the planet.