Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: donh
What you mean to suggest,

No, I say what I mean and I mean what I say. Computer programs cannot approximate reality. They are selective by necessity. This allows the programmer to use the code to promote whatever agenda they wish to promote. The present one, as I have already shown, conveniently fails to punish for useless and non-working functions which should normally be destroyed in real life by 'natural selection'. It is therefore just more evolutionist garbaaaage.

Oh, and (as Columbo would say) just one more thing. If evolution is science, how come evolutionists cannot prove their theory from real life? Science requires observable facts. Therefore evolution cannot be science since it cannot prove itself through observable evidence.

1,860 posted on 05/22/2003 8:13:22 PM PDT by gore3000
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1827 | View Replies ]


To: gore3000
No, I say what I mean and I mean what I say.

You're Popeye the sailor man? toot! toot!

1,864 posted on 05/22/2003 10:05:20 PM PDT by null and void (shiver me timbers!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1860 | View Replies ]

To: gore3000
The present one, as I have already shown, conveniently fails to punish for useless and non-working functions which should normally be destroyed in real life by 'natural selection'.

Spare the rod, spoil the evolution?

1,872 posted on 05/23/2003 10:08:50 AM PDT by jwalsh07
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1860 | View Replies ]

To: gore3000
No, I say what I mean and I mean what I say. Computer programs cannot approximate reality.

Well, then, little bubblehead, my attempt to save you from appearing the total idiot has failed. Any simulation program, and there are hundreds of them, is designed explicitly as an approximation of reality.

If evolution is science, how come evolutionists cannot prove their theory from real life?

If astronomy is a science, how come astronomers cannot prove their their theories from real life?

1,874 posted on 05/23/2003 12:03:53 PM PDT by donh (/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1860 | View Replies ]

To: gore3000
This allows the programmer to use the code to promote whatever agenda they wish to promote.

In exactly the same manner that the experimental processes of science allows scientists to promote whatever agendas they wish. The tendency toward accuracy in science arises from human moral constraints manifested in journalistic rigor and self-critical analysis, not from the nature of scientific experiments.

The present one, as I have already shown, conveniently fails to punish for useless and non-working functions which should normally be destroyed in real life by 'natural selection'.

Since you keep saying this, I decided to go back and figure out why. I can't see it. Only keeping the winners (which is what they did) and punishing the losers are just two sides of the same coin. It still means the losers have no issue in the next generation, and the winners do.

It is therefore just more evolutionist garbaaaage.

It is therefore just another Gore3000-pseudo-factoid exploding abiogenically from the Gore3000 void.

1,876 posted on 05/23/2003 12:37:21 PM PDT by donh (/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1860 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson