goodbye 1st. ammendment

[Rhambuk]

Originally Posted by smokemon [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Well if you belief that then, how do you explain giraffe's being around? The giraffe’s heart generates enormous pressure in order to pump blood all the way up its long neck to its brain. Were it not for its complex blood pressure regulating system, when a giraffe bent over, it would suffer serious brain damage. If it managed to bend over without dying, it wouldn't be able raise its head again. Its brain would suffer from a sudden lack of oxygen, and it would pass out. How did the giraffe acquire that mechanism, because according to evolution it would have had to mutate and evolve this characteristic right? Well how would that be possible if they all would have died before they had that mechanism?

they didnt start that long? over time the neck grew, the heart became stronger to compensate etc etc....

[smokemon]

So where are the fossils of these in-between species ?

[Splorf22]

Originally Posted by smokemon [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

So where are the fossils of these in-between species ?

Because any heuristic based optimization function is very fast at hill climbing?

[smokemon]

Originally Posted by Splorf22 [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Because any heuristic based optimization function is very fast at hill climbing?

http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a302967.pdf

read.

[Splorf22]

Originally Posted by smokemon [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a302967.pdf

read.

I only read the abstract, and I already know that the paper does not say what you think it says. What your paper claims is that genetic algorithms are not better than other optimization algorithms like, say, simulated annealing. Now I am already suspicious of this - if you think about, this kind of thing is very difficult to prove empirically - but I can't be bothered to read the paper deeply enough to look at their methodology.

But it doesn't matter because you totally missed the point. ANY optimization algorithm is GREAT at finding local maxima and minima. The problem is whether you are at a global max/min. Species make perfect sense if you think of each one as a local maximum.

[Rhambuk]

Originally Posted by smokemon [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

So where are the fossils of these in-between species ?

in the ground?

.....

[smokemon]

no. lol, they don't have any linked to them that's the thing.

[Rhambuk]

Originally Posted by smokemon [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

no. lol, they don't have any linked to them that's the thing.

So wheres the link between god and giraffes? i want to see some pixie dust residue at least

[smokemon]

Rhambuk you're making an assumption of God being what is portrayed in media and other outlets of our society. Just because one believes in the historical accuracy of ancient texts and its teaching doesn't mean that I believe God as being some old man with a fuckin' beard in the sky pointing his finger. I believe that our minds can't even begin to fathom God. Just look at the TRILLIONS of universes out there and we are only one. LoLZ

[Rhambuk]

so god did construct giraffes and their complexity, or he didn't?

or some copout about how he was involved but we'll never understand how or why because its not in gods plan.

I tried answering your questions....