If you would take a second to read your own words for understanding, instead of for decibel level, you might fathom why this is such a silly statement.
...
What you mean to suggest, I expect, is that you cannot model reality with perfect fidelity and detail, which is, indeed true, however irrelevant.
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.