Evolution? How?

Liaoning province

When plants and animals die they quickly begin to decay and are usually eaten or scavenged by other organisms. It is an extremely rare event for something to be buried before it is consumed, but occasionally remains are preserved in this way and, over millions of years, they become fossils. Species that live in water stand the best chance of becoming fossilized, as their dead bodies are quickly covered by sediment when they sink to the bottom. Sealed away from the usual processes of decay, these buried corpses gradually turn into fossils.

This was the fate of the plants and animals that lived in the uplands of Liaoning province, northeastern China, more than 120 million years ago. At that time, the forested lakesides of Liaoning were full of a variety of wildlife. From time to time, nearby volcanoes would erupt, sending clouds of poisonous gas and ash into the air, killing anything in their path. The gas killed everything that breathed it and the dead were sometimes covered with a fine powder of volcanic ash, delicately shrouding their bodies, preserving them in unimaginable detail.

http://critticall.com/

Can anyone explain this to me?

Oh, I read about something like that.

Somebody decided the best way to write computer programs was to do it through Evolutionary principles. That's an interesting concept, indeed. I wonder if it'll work.

Genetic programming (GP) is an automated method for creating a working computer program from a high-level problem statement of a problem. Genetic programming starts from a high-level statement of "what needs to be done" and automatically creates a computer program to solve the problem.

There are now 36 instances where genetic programming has automatically produced a result that is competitive with human performance, including 15 instances where genetic programming has created an entity that either infringes or duplicates the functionality of a previously patented 20th-century invention, 6 instances where genetic programming has done the same with respect to a 21st-centry invention, and 2 instances where genetic programming has created a patentable new invention.

Wolf_ODonnell wrote:

Oh, I read about something like that.

Somebody decided the best way to write computer programs was to do it through Evolutionary principles. That's an interesting concept, indeed. I wonder if it'll work.

It's already working.

And in my opinion it is the future of all programming.

the links I provided in the previous post wrote:

Genetic programming (GP) is an automated method for creating a working computer program from a high-level problem statement of a problem. Genetic programming starts from a high-level statement of "what needs to be done" and automatically creates a computer program to solve the problem.

Lots of beat and scene objectives, no superobjectives. The "goalless" claim is usually made to point out that we (or anything else) is not an ordained "end." We describe the evolution of the human being as a goal-oriented process because we are human beings. Similarly, other organisms, from tapeworms to lice to mycoplasmas, lost functional elements when they evolved to ever more specialized niches. There is no goal as in bigger and better -- we just like to look at things that way because we like a sense of narrative. We name things and make up stories to justify their presence and their observable qualities, but when it comes down to it, shite just happens. That's not having a goal.

But, of course, if something ceases to reproduce, it won't be around for us to make up stories about, and so we only make the stories about things that appear to have a narrative.




(Utter rubbish, this.)

Gallup: More Than Half of Americans Reject Evolution, Back Bible

By E&P Staff

Published: March 08, 2006 10:15 AM ET

NEW YORK A Gallup report released today reveals that more than half of all Americans, rejecting evolution theory and scientific evidence, agree with the statement, "God created man exactly how Bible describes it."

Another 31% says that man did evolve, but "God guided." Only 12% back evolution and say "God had no part."

Gallup summarized it this way: "Surveys repeatedly show that a substantial portion of Americans do not believe that the theory of evolution best explains where life came from." They are "not so quick to agree with the preponderance of scientific evidence."

The report was written by the director of the The Gallup Poll, Frank Newport.

Breaking down the numbers, Gallup finds that Republican backing for what it calls "God created human beings in present form" stands at 57% with Democrats at 44%.

Support for this Bible view rises steadily with age: from 43% for those 18 to 29, to 59% for those 65 and older. It declines steadily with education, dropping from 58% for those with high school degrees to a still-substantial 25% with postgraduate degrees.

Newport wraps it up: "Several characteristics correlate with belief in the biblical explanation for the origin of humans. Those with lower levels of education, those who attend church regularly, those who are 65 and older, and those who identify with the Republican Party are more likely to believe that God created humans 'as is,' than are those who do not share these characteristics."

Gallup has asked this question, in different forms, going back to 1982, but has consistently shown support at 45% or higher for the notion that "God created man in present form."

The most recent poll, last September, posed the question this way: "Which of the following statements comes closest to your views on the origin and devlopment of human beings." This produced the 53% who chose "God created man exactly how Bible describes it."

In most things religious or politics, it's not a matter of intelligence.