Paul: 1 revision

2014-05-30T07:40:04Z

1 revision

at 07:40, 30 May 2014

2014-05-30T07:40:04Z

Paul: 1 revision

2014-05-30T07:30:22Z

1 revision

at 07:30, 30 May 2014

2014-05-30T07:30:22Z

Paul: 1 revision

2014-05-29T14:28:25Z

1 revision

at 14:28, 29 May 2014

2014-05-29T14:28:24Z

Paul: 1 revision

2014-05-29T13:32:49Z

1 revision

at 13:32, 29 May 2014

2014-05-29T13:32:49Z

Paul: 1 revision

2014-05-25T09:02:34Z

1 revision

at 09:02, 25 May 2014

2014-05-25T09:02:34Z

@@ Line 24: / Line 24: @@
 ==References==
 <references></references>
-  [[Category:Umasking Evolution]]
+  [[Category:Unmasking Evolution]]

@@ Line 7: / Line 7: @@
 ==The Facts Are ..... ==
-(1) Evolution simulations made for computers always 'prove' evolution because the parameters on which the program is based are evolutionary. In other words a program is written with evolutionary data inserted into it, and then used to prove evolution - a case of circular reasoning. [based on logic]
+{{Fact|1}} Evolution simulations made for computers always 'prove' evolution because the parameters on which the program is based are evolutionary. In other words a program is written with evolutionary data inserted into it, and then used to prove evolution - a case of circular reasoning. [based on logic]
-(2) Many of the 'proofs' of evolution touted today are based on computer analysis of existing data.
+{{Fact|2}} Many of the 'proofs' of evolution touted today are based on computer analysis of existing data.
 These computer programs analyse data using a formula, or compare it with a set of parameters or conditions. Unfortunately, as evolution is a historical theory, any formulae or parameters used are based on the scientist's assumptions about the past. If the assumptions are wrong, or based on circular reasoning, then the analysis is not valid. As there is no way of going back in time to scientifically monitor past conditions, all such computer programs are only tools of supposition, and can never be used to prove evolution. Based on the logic of computer simulations and historical analysis. c.f. The Australian, December 3, 1991
-(3) The computer programs which are used to analyse data from distant parts of the universe which we can't see or visit, are unsatisfactory analytical tools. These programs are also based on supposition and theory, no matter how factual scientist's believe their models are. Change the suppositions, alter the parameters, or adjust the formula, and a completely new analysis will result. Based on the logic of computer simulations and historical analysis. c.f. The Australian, December 3, 1991
+{{Fact|3}} The computer programs which are used to analyse data from distant parts of the universe which we can't see or visit, are unsatisfactory analytical tools. These programs are also based on supposition and theory, no matter how factual scientist's believe their models are. Change the suppositions, alter the parameters, or adjust the formula, and a completely new analysis will result. Based on the logic of computer simulations and historical analysis. c.f. The Australian, December 3, 1991
-(4) Programmer John Schneider, in a letter to Science News, points out that T.S Ray's computer programs 'Tierra', contains mutations (random changes) which only produces a new combination of the same instructions. None of the 'evolved' organisms display any capability that did not already exist in the original 'organisms' program code. In other words, no Tierran 'organism' invented any new instructions, which is required for upward evolution. Schneider also points out that the rules incorporated in the program by Ray were contrived by him to keep Tierra's 'evolution' going. Science News, November 30, 1991
+{{Fact|4}} Programmer John Schneider, in a letter to Science News, points out that T.S Ray's computer programs 'Tierra', contains mutations (random changes) which only produces a new combination of the same instructions. None of the 'evolved' organisms display any capability that did not already exist in the original 'organisms' program code. In other words, no Tierran 'organism' invented any new instructions, which is required for upward evolution. Schneider also points out that the rules incorporated in the program by Ray were contrived by him to keep Tierra's 'evolution' going. Science News, November 30, 1991
-(5) The jellyfish produced by the artistic abilities of one evolution simulator is an example of the contrived way in which computer programs 'prove' evolution. When the program produces a 2-dimensional image of a blob, which bears no resemblance to a jellyfish, the simulation will eventually draw a jellyfish. The artists admit that they intervene to push evolution in certain directions, and it is actually they who determine the degree of fitness required for survival. New Scientist, September 19, 1992 p:11
+{{Fact|5}} The jellyfish produced by the artistic abilities of one evolution simulator is an example of the contrived way in which computer programs 'prove' evolution. When the program produces a 2-dimensional image of a blob, which bears no resemblance to a jellyfish, the simulation will eventually draw a jellyfish. The artists admit that they intervene to push evolution in certain directions, and it is actually they who determine the degree of fitness required for survival. New Scientist, September 19, 1992 p:11
-(6) Richard Dawkins, has admitted that he has played the role of a 'creator' in a replicating and mutating program that he described in his book "The Blind Watchmaker". Science author Richard Milton describes the images produced by such evolution simulators as not corresponding in any way at all with living things, except the purely trivial way that someone sees resemblance in their shape.
+{{Fact|6}} Richard Dawkins, has admitted that he has played the role of a 'creator' in a replicating and mutating program that he described in his book "The Blind Watchmaker". Science author Richard Milton describes the images produced by such evolution simulators as not corresponding in any way at all with living things, except the purely trivial way that someone sees resemblance in their shape.
 Dawkins admits that he played the role of a 'creator' as he chose which ones of the images were the most promising. He has also admitted that he bred each generation from whichever image looked like an insect, and that is the reason why they ended up looking so real. Richard Milton, "The Facts Of Life: Shattering the Myth of Darwinism", Fourth Estate: London. 1992 p:148

← Older revision		Revision as of 13:32, 29 May 2014
Line 1:		Line 1:

−	~~=Computer Simulations=~~
	{{Evolution Says\|Computer simulations prove that evolution did		{{Evolution Says\|Computer simulations prove that evolution did

← Older revision	Revision as of 07:40, 30 May 2014
(No difference)

← Older revision	Revision as of 07:30, 30 May 2014
(No difference)

← Older revision	Revision as of 14:28, 29 May 2014
(No difference)

← Older revision	Revision as of 09:02, 25 May 2014
(No difference)

Review:Computer Simulations - Revision history

Paul: 1 revision

at 07:40, 30 May 2014

Paul: 1 revision

at 07:30, 30 May 2014

Paul: 1 revision

at 14:28, 29 May 2014

Paul: 1 revision

at 13:32, 29 May 2014

Paul: 1 revision

at 09:02, 25 May 2014