Definition of evidence?

Originally posted by sonship
David Berlinski bemoans the absence of convincing evidence for Darwinan theory in Biology.

Why can't we program a genetic algorithm to simulate what Evolution is suppose to do ? He says we should be able to do that as in other hard sciences.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VHeSaUq-Hl8

Because Evil-lution is a myth - A fairy tale for grownups, as one scientist put it. 😏

Originally posted by sonship
David Berlinski bemoans the absence of convincing evidence for Darwinan theory in Biology.

Why can't we program a genetic algorithm to simulate what Evolution is suppose to do ? He says we should be able to do that as in other hard sciences.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VHeSaUq-Hl8

Well He's lying from start to finish, And we can program a genetic algorithm to do
what evolution is supposed to do.

In fact Richard Dawkins created one specially for one of his series on evolution.

Genetic algorithms are used in AI research, and automated learning programs.
They are used by engineers, physicists, and biologists.

What he is saying is just flat out false. He knows it, and is lying through his teeth.

The fossil record is not "baffling" or "mystifying" and does support evolution, and
matches all the predictions made by Darwinian theory.

The "Cambrian Explosion" is perfectly compatible with evolution and doesn't trouble
it at all.

We can and have many many many times theoretically used natural selection and
random genetic variation to produce complexity.

And he's wrong again. Evolution does make testable predictions that match observation
and evolution is and has been used to make many predictions that have been experimentally
verified.

Evolutionary biology IS a serious science and unlike General Relativity, Evolution by natural selection
is not known to be wrong.

As I say, you can, and many people have, created evolutionary programs in computers.
In fact people do it all the time.

YES IT IS A SIMPLE MECHANISM THAT CAN BE EASILY PROGRAMMED ON A COMPUTER...
THAT'S WHY IT HAS BEEN PROGRAMMED ON A COMPUTER MANY MANY MANY TIMES AND IT
WORKS. Lying hypocritical moron.


Ok now he's just admitting he's totally incompetent at computer programming if he can't create
a genetic algorithm himself.


And now he's lying about the experiences of everyone in his field* who isn't incompetent like
he is and can create working genetic algorithms.
*Assuming he does actually have any sort of qualification or expertise in this field which looks
unlikely at this point.

Yeah this guy is just lying through his teeth at every turn.

This is a pathetic video.


EDIT: Oh what a surprise this idiot works for the discovery institute. Nuff said.

Originally posted by googlefudge

...a majority populated Christian
country?

I do not get it. How can a reasonable, intelligent, educated person not see the flaw?

Originally posted by apathist
I do not get it. How can a reasonable, intelligent, educated person not see the flaw?

This may just be me... But I am not clear quite what you are saying.

I don't know if you are claiming their is a flaw in my argument or Suzianne's...

I think I was on this point: eg if you are born in the middle east, you're Muslim. Religion is not about the gods, instead it is about culture.

Originally posted by googlefudge
Well He's lying from start to finish, And we can program a genetic algorithm to do
what evolution is supposed to do.

In fact Richard Dawkins created one specially for one of his series on evolution.

Genetic algorithms are used in AI research, and automated learning programs.
They are used by engineers, physicists, and biologists.

What he is s EDIT: Oh what a surprise this idiot works for the discovery institute. Nuff said.

You're behaving just like Dasa, accusing everyone whom you disagree with of dishonesty.

Originally posted by sonship
You're behaving just like Dasa, accusing everyone whom you disagree with of dishonesty.

RJHinds made a specific claim about genetic algorithms. Are you saying the claim is true?

Originally posted by googlefudge
Well He's lying from start to finish, And we can program a genetic algorithm to do
what evolution is supposed to do.

In fact Richard Dawkins created one specially for one of his series on evolution.

Genetic algorithms are used in AI research, and automated learning programs.
They are used by engineers, physicists, and biologists.

What he is s ...[text shortened]... EDIT: Oh what a surprise this idiot works for the discovery institute. Nuff said.

You misunderstand what Dr. Berlinski has said. He says, that no one has programmed a genetic algorithm by using Darwinian theory to do what evolution is supposed to do and the only way that it can be done is by not using the Darwinian theory. Listen to him and hear it for yourself.

Dr. David Berlinski - On Evolution (1/3)
YouTube

Dr. David Berlinski - On Evolution (2/3)
YouTube

Dr. David Berlinski - On Evolution (3/3)
YouTube

Originally posted by sonship
You're behaving just like Dasa, accusing everyone whom you disagree with of dishonesty.

No. I am accusing the idiot in the video of lying.

I am doing so because pretty much everything he said was untrue and that in my estimation
there is no way he doesn't know that.

He is thus telling deliberate untruths which is generally referred to as lying.



I went through that video and pointed out a whole host of things that he said that were factually
incorrect. Are you going to deal with any of those points or are you just going to claim I am biased
and run away?

Originally posted by RJHinds
You misunderstand what Dr. Berlinski has said. He says, that no one has programmed a genetic algorithm by using Darwinian theory to do what evolution is supposed to do and the only way that it can be done is by not using the Darwinian theory. Listen to him and hear it for yourself.

Dr. David Berlinski - On Evolution (1/3)
http://www.youtube.com/watch? ...[text shortened]... zUEWtKq4

Dr. David Berlinski - On Evolution (3/3)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wnjnIwDkN0o

No I understood what he was saying perfectly.

I don't need to see any more of his lies to know his position is untenable.

I mean I've worked with people who wrote/used genetic algorithms for heavens sake.

Plus that was far from the only thing he lied about.

Pretty much everything he said about the fossil record was wrong for starters.

He's a liar who works for an organisation set up specifically to spread and promote lies.

As such he has negative credibility.

Originally posted by apathist
I think I was on this point: eg if you are born in the middle east, you're Muslim. Religion is not about the gods, instead it is about culture.

Ok, I hoped that was what you were saying but it wasn't clear to me.

Thank you for the clarification.

Originally posted by sonship
You're behaving just like Dasa, accusing everyone whom you disagree with of dishonesty.

unlike dasa, googlefudge has a mountain on top of a mountain of facts, data and experts that back up what he's saying. dasa has zero.]


edit: there is nothing wrong in calling people liars if you can prove that they are lying.

Originally posted by stellspalfie
unlike dasa, googlefudge has a mountain on top of a mountain of facts, data and experts that back up what he's saying. dasa has zero.]


edit: there is nothing wrong in calling people liars if you can prove that they are lying.

That is just it, googlefudge can't prove it. He is all mouth with no bite. 😏

Originally posted by googlefudge
No I understood what he was saying perfectly.

I don't need to see any more of his lies to know his position is untenable.

I mean I've worked with people who wrote/used genetic algorithms for heavens sake.

Plus that was far from the only thing he lied about.

Pretty much everything he said about the fossil record was wrong for starters.

He's ...[text shortened]... ation set up specifically to spread and promote lies.

As such he has negative credibility.

I say, from his credientials and from the fact that he has examined the evidence from an unbiased position, that he has more credibility with me than you and your biased cohorts will ever have. Also, it is my understanding that the organization that he works for is set up to seek out the truth and present the evidence as it really is instead of filtered by the evil-lution doctrine. 😏

Originally posted by RJHinds
... he has examined the evidence from an unbiased position,

... it is my understanding that the organization that he works for is set up
to seek out the truth and present the evidence as it really is instead of filtered
by the evil-lution doctrine.

No need to discredit your posts,
you do it so well yourself!

😏