Except that natural genetics and evolutionary processes lead to thought/consciousness. And this is exactly the system being replicated.
It's true that this evolved through evolution. However, I thought your point was that genetic programming was part of the solution. Now, if you're just suggesting that genetic programming could be used as a method for figuring out what the solution is, and from that point it can be abandoned, well that makes a little
more sense because we know that worked for evolution.
However there are some MAJOR problems with that idea. First it involves quantizing the problem as a set of variables and a fitness or heuristic function.
1) You would have to come up with a genetic code similar to DNA. This is no simple task, there is no such field in this area to date, it would like take many decades of research to come up with the principles necessary to ensure proper diversity. We can use some of our knowledge of DNA but there are still too many secrets.
2) The fact is that even our best minimization techniques do not work on extremely large dimensional problems with highly irregular state spaces! For this we would need to have DNA strings comparable in length to human DNA and that would make it a 600,000 dimensional problem. Completely out of the scope of what we can do currently.
3) It would take comparable time to run as it took for the traits to evolve in humans. Sure we can be more direct with a computer, but it'd still probably take hundreds of thousands of years to run that program.
So your silly prediction is better than my silly prediction?
My "theories"? I didn't make an theories, I merely pointed out that it is not possible to make predictions on when we will discover something when nobody has got a clue where to start looking. It's like asking when will the cake be done baking when nobody knows what the word "cake" means!!