And that is the intelligent part.(along with the darn program to implement the process)
Sure. And where have I argued against intelligence in terms of design of the problem? NO WHERE.
Why do you stop running? Not because the problem decides “it’s done”. It’ll keep going! It’ll stop ONLY when YOU decide it’s done.
BUT, if you let it run and run and run you’ll end up with a fairly stable population that tends to resemble itself generation after generation because the predominant member of the population is a pretty good solution.
Anyway, we’re way beyond the original question, which was about some author’s rant about GAs, and in fact it’s been shown that he doesn’t understand GAs at all. The mechanisms we’re discussing would not even be considered by the author as he doesn’t even acknowledge the basics of a GA that you and I - clearly on opposite sides of the theory of evolution - agree on!
The author, David Abel, is pretty much lost when it comes to understanding of a GA as he shows with his ignorance about what they are, how they work, and where they are used. It would make as much sense as asking a 3 year old to tell us how a multi-axis CNC machine works, when you use it, and what kind of things you can make with it.
So let’s get back to the fundamental question about the whole evolution/creation thing:
If the Creation story is to be taken as literal and inerrant and complete, then tell me where Cain’s wife came from. If the Bible is historically accurate enough to provide complete details of the Creation story, then isn’t it also accurate enough to tell us where Cain’s wife came from?
Do you believe that there's any such thing as an undirected natural process? Formation of a planet, formation of a storm, development of an embryo?
If so, do you think there's any valid way to model that process with a computer, or do you think any such effort would be flawed by the fact that the programmers had the goal of a storm or a birth in mind and weighted things that way?