Evidence for God from Science

Could someone point out to me how the theory that life arose from natural selection has been used in computer design, cause this is just too funny.

Comparing evolution to physics and chemistry, is like comparing a pile of dung, an apple, and a t-bone, and saying see they are all food.

Cheeesh if we throw evolution in the dung heap I suppose everything will stop working. All will be lost.

Empty claims show the absurd evidenceless evolution for what it is.

Could someone point out to me how the theory that life arose from natural selection

No such theory. Abiogenesis does not involve natural selection. Perhaps other evolutionary processes were involved. Were you confusing the methodological naturalism we were talking about, with evolutionary theory in particular?

has been used in computer design, cause this is just too funny.

Actually, engineers are beginning to realize that natural selection works better than design in many complicated problems. Engineers call it "genetic algorithms."

Here's a place to learn about how it works to solve very difficult engineering problems:

"Evolutionary Algorithms (EAs) are artificial intelligence techniques which mimic nature according to Darwin's "survival of the fittest" principle. They randomly encode physical (quantitative or qualitative) variables via digital DNA inside computers and are known for their robustness to better explore search spaces and find near-global optima than traditional optimization methods. For this reason Evolutionary Algorithms are becoming widely used in many engineering and scientific problems."
http://europa.eu.int/comm/research/brit ... -3-01.html

It looks like God knew what He was doing, after all.

Comparing evolution to physics and chemistry, is like comparing a pile of dung, an apple, and a t-bone, and saying see they are all food.

As you've seen, a lot of your objections to science are really misconceptions about what it is. People who think they hate science usually don't understand it.

Cheeesh if we throw evolution in the dung heap I suppose everything will stop working. All will be lost. [/quoe]

Well, it will certainly make aircraft engineering more difficult. It's increasingly relied upon to make them safer and more efficient.

Well, it will certainly make aircraft engineering more difficult


<O+<

So as you can see this equation points out the simplicity of continuos claims that are not supported by any evidence.

Did you not go to the link that tells you how evolutionary processes are making aircraft engineering better? It's not just aircraft, either. Here's some more for you to learn about...

"Convergent Thinking Applies Darwinism
to Develop Better Diesel Engines
by Erin Hatfield

Computer-aided testing in engine research is nothing new. But how about using Darwinism to improve diesel engine design?...

The Evolution of an Engine
The complex interaction between fluid dynamics and engine geometry requires that Convergent Thinking use genetic algorithms to further improve its CFD findings. The engineering firm runs genetic algorithms based on the optimized engine settings, allowing them to simulate the performance of a group of engines, each with a slightly different design...

After running the genetic algorithm scenarios, the computer models select the best performer from a group of trials, much like natural selection in biological evolution, and combine characteristics from that engine with those of other high performers. The engines with these "genes" are simulated using the same CFD and visualization process as in past studies. Senecal then rates the engines on their fuel efficiency and the amount of soot and nitrate wastes they generate."
http://www.ensight.com/news/convergent.html

Diesel engines run cleaner and more efficiently, thanks to Darwinian theory.

And:
"The past decade has witnessed many exciting advances in the use of genetic algorithms (GAs) to solve optimization problems in everything from product design to scheduling and client/server networking. Aided by GAs, analysts and designers now routinely evolve solutions to complex combinatorial and multiobjective optimization problems with an ease and rapidity unthinkable withconventional methods. Despite the continued growth and refinement of this powerful analytical tool, there continues to be a lack of up-to-date guides to contemporary GA optimization principles and practices. Written by two of the world's leading experts in the field, this book fills that gap in the literature."


Darwin would no doubt be amazed to learn how powerful and applicable his theory really is. It turns out that processes in biology can be copied in other disciplines to solve problems that could not otherwise be solved.

Imagine that.

And here's another one:

"Let Darwinism loose in an electronics lab and just watch what it
creates. A lean, mean machine that nobody understands. Clive Davidson
reports:...

It is unremarkable that a microprocessor can perform such a
task--except in this case. Even though the circuit consists of only a
small number of basic components, the researcher, Adrian Thompson,
does not know how it works. He can't ask the designer because there
wasn't one. Instead, the circuit evolved from a "primordial soup" of
silicon components guided by the principles of genetic variation and
survival of the fittest."
http://www.netscrap.com/netscrap_detail.cfm?scrap_id=73

Thanks for the nonsense. I'm pretty sure that you apply Intelligent Design when you make things that are better than their predescessors...We don't have enough time in the first place, and second, machines don't reproduce

AttentionKMartShoppers wrote:Thanks for the nonsense. I'm pretty sure that you apply Intelligent Design when you make things that are better than their predescessors...We don't have enough time in the first place, and second, machines don't reproduce

Exactly. They use DNA of sorts big whoop. DNA existed long before evolution. It appearas they are using a design that is better than what man can design. Biology, DNA, and natural processes are independant of evolution.

Yehren wrote:To replace materialistic explanations with the theistic understanding that nature and hurnan beings are created by God.

http://64.233.167.104/u/discovery?q=cac ... n&ie=UTF-8
C: I'm just quoting from the governing goals. Let me quote it exactly.
SM(Dr. Stephen Meyer): Yeah, go ahead.
C: “Replace materialistic explanations with a theistic understanding that nature and
human beings are created by God.” What's more straightforward than that?
SM: Well, what's wrong with that?

sandy_mcd wrote:

Yehren wrote:To replace materialistic explanations with the theistic understanding that nature and hurnan beings are created by God.

http://64.233.167.104/u/discovery?q=cac ... n&ie=UTF-8
C: I'm just quoting from the governing goals. Let me quote it exactly.
SM(Dr. Stephen Meyer): Yeah, go ahead.
C: “Replace materialistic explanations with a theistic understanding that nature and
human beings are created by God.” What's more straightforward than that?
SM: Well, what's wrong with that?

Well done sandy. Exactly the point. Do not attempt to call ID a scientific refutation to evolution. Also it has been made clear that evolution cannot in any scope make a justifiable cause for creation. The two being obviously interdependent, are still for the purposes of empiricism, separate.

It is obvious to me there is intelligence behind the design of everything in the universe, but that does not make it fact. It is opinion only, based on passive observation, that has built a belief, which is not science.

It is obvious to me there is [evolution] behind [] everything in the universe, but that does not make it fact. It is opinion only, based on passive observation, that has built a belief, which is not science.

Hmmm This seems to work for evolution as well.