Artificial Life Experiments Show How Complex Functions Can Evolve

NSF ^ | May 8, 2003 | Staff

[AndrewC]

and none of which are either insults or placemarkers.

And a skunk loves her children, so what? She still stinks.

[Lurking Libertarian]

What is your point? Gore3000 accused Patrick Henry of posting nothing on this thread but insults and placemarkers. Patrick showed G3K that that wasn't true. G3K repeated his slander. I called him on that. Now you jump in with a gratuitous insult. This accomplishes what, exactly?

[AndrewC]

Now you jump in with a gratuitous insult.

Exactly whom did I insult?

[PatrickHenry]

This accomplishes what, exactly?

It's a clear demonstration of a poster's integrity, of his character, of his innate worth as a human being. For all to see. That's an accomplishment. Perhaps not the one intended, but there it is.

[Lurking Libertarian]

Exactly whom did I insult?

You compare a member of this forum to a skunk and ask whom you insulted?

My intelligence, for one.

[AndrewC]

You compare a member of this forum to a skunk and ask whom you insulted?

Precisely whom? Again, I ask the question to whom are you referring? I referred to a skunk and only a skunk.(unless you assert that a skunks children are not skunks, hmm you are a Darwinian.).

[PatrickHenry]

Check out post 1677 for more of the same. Purest bile. Quite expected from this source. Of no consequence.

[AndrewC]

Purest bile.

Mr. "Iaminnocent" I addressed it directly to you. Unlike your hidden sniping.

[f.Christian]

You can't be friends with a liberal ...

look what happened to trent lott ---

any sign of weakness -- slip and they will destroy you !

They have no honor -- decency !

[f.Christian]

... evo cult (( vampires )) !

[general_re]

...you cannot simulate reality...computer programs cannot approximate reality...

What's really fascinating - and I admit that this is much more interesting to me, in the bloody-wreck-on-the-side-of-the-road sense, than ignorance about how exponents work or failures to understand middle-school plane geometry - is that this sort of denial really amounts to nothing less than a denial of at least the last 600 years or so of Western rationalism. A denial of a rationalism which has always been predicated on the assumption that the universe was a rational place, put together by a rational God, and that therefore you could rationally understand the world around you by modeling some aspect of it, even if the models were imperfect and incomplete representations of reality. The difference between Leonardo's models and computer simulations of everything from evolution to spaceflight to oil exploration is merely a difference of degree, not a difference of kind - the only difference is in the sophistication of the models. One wonders if denying evolution is really worth the price, if that price is simultaneously denying one of the core concepts of Western scientific and philosophical thought. I'm almost afraid to ask what sort of mysticism is proposed as an alternative...

And there was infused in that brain such grace from God, and a power of expression in such sublime accord with the intellect and memory that served it, and he knew so well how to express his conceptions by draughtmanship, that he vanquished with his discourse, and confuted with his reasoning, every valiant wit. And he was continually making models and designs to show men how to remove mountains with ease, and how to bore them in order to pass from one level to another; and by means of levers, windlasses, and screws, he showed the way to raise and draw great weights, together with methods for emptying harbours, and pumps for removing water from low places, things which his brain never ceased from devising.

- Giorgio Vasari, Life of Leonardo da Vinci (1550)

[Junior]

You forgot "chimps have tails, and there are no plant phyla."

[Junior]

Of course they were. That is why the atheist/materialist/evolutionists insult me.

No, we insult you because you make stupid statements, Mr. "1⁷²⁰ is a really big number." We insult you because you post before you think. We insult you because we know that 30 seconds on Google would save you hours of embarrasment, but you never quite figure that out. And finally, we insult you because you start out as a blank slate on every one of these threads; you make the same tired, stupid, already-refuted arguments that the other creationists have abandoned (except for the one or two newbies to these threads, and they quickly either disappear or update their repetoire). You don't learn. Everyone of us, creationist or evolutionist, has expanded our knowledge via these threads -- except for you. You haven't figured out that you don't "win" debates by being obtuse, by posting the same tired crap over and over again until the opposition just ignores you. You win by presenting the better argument. Unfortunately, you are so far behind the power curve when it comes to this that you are forced to rely on the former method; you have nothing new or interesting (except as entertainment value) to add to these discourses. We now only read your posts to find the bloopers, as that is becoming something of a sport on the threads you post upon. And, fortunately, you seldom fail to deliver.

So, go on thinking you're winning. Hubris brings out the idiot in you. Eventually, however, your one or two die-hard fans will even start denying you speak for the creationist side.

[PatrickHenry]

I'm almost afraid to ask what sort of mysticism is proposed as an alternative ...

No need to wonder. If that alternative should come to pass, you and I will be among the first to be slaughtered. Or maybe we'll go in the second or third wave of purification, because there are far more prominent thinkers out there than you and I. It will then be the victorious creationists who will have to live, somehow, in the hell-on-earth that will inevitably result from their ceaseless war on reason.

[To anyone who's wondering ... yeah, I'm talking about you.]

[general_re]

We should take steps to mitigate the damage in case the worst does come to pass - I think we ought to collect up the sort of rationally obtained knowledge which is denied here, and preserve it for future generations to rediscover after the end of the coming Second Dark Ages. Of course, it'll have to be in an easily-digestible format, since they'll need to re-learn virtually everything from the ground up. My personal contribution to the time capsule will be a little index card that says: THE LIGHTS IN THE SKY AT NIGHT ARE CALLED "STARS".

[PatrickHenry]

Ever read one of Asimov's best-known stories -- Nightfall? Well worth a look in this context.

[f.Christian]

Evolution (( fortuitous mutation // anarchy )) is a was on science !

[PatrickHenry]

1900 coming up. Go for it.

[f.Christian]

Evolution is a hopeless dichotomy ... just playing a word game --- name change with truth -- science !

Main Entry: pla·gia·rize
Pronunciation: 'plA-j&-"rIz also -jE-&-
Function: verb
Inflected Form(s): -rized; -riz·ing
Etymology: plagiary
Date: 1716
transitive senses : to steal and pass off (the ideas or words of another) as one's own : use (another's production) without crediting the source
intransitive senses : to commit literary theft : present as new and original an idea or product derived from an existing source
- pla·gia·riz·er noun

[f.Christian]

Is it real or memorex ... the edited -- faked (( evolution )) --- sounds better !