Quite the contrary, Andrew, I have repeatedly tried to get you to just stop dancing and discuss the implications of the fact that evolutionary processes can produce complex solutions to non-trivial problems, as shown by the generation of the evolved circuits previously mentioned, and other examples.
Instead, you nitpick and bitch and moan about trivialities like whether substituting a transistor for a diode (in a perfectly accepted method) is enough of an excuse for you to avoid talking about the REAL issues.
So I started documenting all of your silly side trips and red herrings, in an attempt to shame you into dropping the dance and talking about the central topic. It turns out that such an approach won't work because you have no shame.
That's when I declared that you had lost the discussion, as indeed you have. Playing "how long can I nitpick" ad absurdum just demonstrates your intellectual cowardice in a manner that isn't fooling anyone.
(Just out of curiosity -- if I get annoyed enough at your antics to cut to the chase and actually breadboard the circuits in question, test them, will *that* finally be good enough to end your digressions, or will you pull a whole new list of excuses out of your hat for putting off dealing with the obvious?)
Now -- are you finally going to discuss the implications of the results, (yes, SIMULATED or otherwise, Herring Boy), or are you going to raise more useless side issues like "well, unterminated leads can *possibly* cause interference, and even though I haven't the slightest idea whether the purple transistor in this case *will* cause any interference bigger than a mosquito fart, by gosh it's a good enough excuse for denouncing the whole thing as unsupported lies by those damned evilutionists, I'm such a clever guy!!"
You've lost. You lost a dozen posts ago, at least. Dig yourself deeper if you choose, it's your own hole and welcome to it.
Breadboard it, evidently it has not been done.