Evolutionists using evolution-based computer programs to prove evolution
It has long been known by Darwinists and non-Darwinists alike that neither the fossil record nor empirical laboratory research has proven or even supported the philosophy of macroevolution (the particles-to-people idea). For example, since 1988 evolutionary researcher Richard Lenski has worked with the common bacterium Escherichia coli (E. coli) in an effort to authenticate evolution. Only trivial changes have been observed after many bacterial generations. Yes, the bacteria have changed slightly, but they stubbornly remain E. coli. Real vertical change—macroevolution—has yet to be empirically validated.
In an effort to somehow justify their contention that no Creator was involved in their origin, secular scientists have turned to the computer revolution for help. Enter Avida—a software platform using digital creatures to test Darwin’s idea of evolution by natural selection. This is accomplished using computer programs (digital creatures) that supposedly self-replicate and “evolve.” What biology will not reveal, the Caltech and Michigan State University project will! The project uses 200 computers to observe the birth and death of thousands of generations of digital creatures based on an evolutionary program. The self-replicating code determines how these non-organic creatures of cyberspace use resources and reproduce. But even though it has taken over ten years of development, the researchers are no closer to describing the origin of any living creature in the earth’s ecosystem. Indeed, these strings of codes are not alive; they are not even carbon-based (organic).
Artificial Intelligence Requires Intelligent Creators
It cannot be lost on the various Michigan State and Caltech researchers that the computers are made by intelligent engineers and are painstakingly programmed by goal-directed programmers. Nothing in the program production was left to chance. Evolutionists are proceeding in a specific direction: to prove evolution. Should anyone be surprised when they were to finally reach that goal? If a computer program requires someone to write it, then the infinitely more complex DNA code requires “a huge intelligence” (Abate 2001).
Preprogrammed Darwinism vs. God’s “Clearly Seen” Creation
Creation scientists see several bugs in this evolutionary Avida program. A cosmic explosion supposedly formed our universe and planet over billions of years, after which organic life sprang into existence over the next few millions of years. Avida does not address how any of this occurred. Avida begins with sophisticated organic life, taking for granted that life evolved from non-life. That’s a suppositional leap of Olympic proportions.
Avida is an extraordinarily simple artificial world, composed of creatures programmed by Darwinists to evolve in a certain direction. Indeed, the program was stacked in favor of evolution using unrealistic parameters such as low mutation rates and very high selection pressure and fertility rates.
The program has been formulated to describe how evolution works, and yet it has so far failed, even with outside intelligent interference. For example, these digital organisms were rewarded when they acted in a manner a researcher found appropriate; thus, their evolution was influenced in a specific direction.
The fossil record, experimentation with living organisms, and now evolution-friendly computer programs all fail to corroborate macroevolution. How long before the secular scientist will consider The Alternative?
Citations
Abate, Tom. 2001. Human genome map has scientists talking about the divine: Surprisingly low number of genes raises big questions. SFGate.com, February 19, 2001, http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cg
