>>498690Okay so we have a theory, and we can take principles from it and simulate it. This in itself is not evidence of anything at all.
It's ONLY EVIDENCE if the simulation can be used to make predictions, and then those predictions occur.
For instance, I can simulate newton's laws, and use it to predict where a cannon ball launched from a cannon will land.
You however cannot simulate evolution, only principles of it. You cannot simulate the evolution of all modern species or even a single species. Even if you did this is not a prediction. If you were able to some how put in all the data necessary in order to model evolution and make predictions about what will happen in the future. The timescale is too long and we cannot observe if these predictions come true.
So lets review
A model of a few principles is not a complete model.
Models that cannot be used to make predictions are not evidence.
There are no evolutionary computer models that make predictions about evolution of species in real life, it's too complicated to model accurately.
Even if you could the predictions would occur on a timescale we cannot observe.
A computer model of cars evolving to drive on terrain, or of clocks learning to tell time, or of a wind turbine to maximize efficiency are a demonstration of principles. If this is evidence at all, it's only evidence that evolution works **IN PRINCIPLE**
I'm not even anti evolution, I believe it to be true; but you dogmatists defending evolution in this thread are fucking retarded I swear.
