Ah, if only Uri was stealthy...
Advertisement

by Dyakovo » Sat May 16, 2015 7:43 am

by Bralia » Sat May 16, 2015 7:47 am

by Hurdegaryp » Sat May 16, 2015 7:52 am
CVT Temp wrote:I mean, we can actually create a mathematical definition for evolution in terms of the evolutionary algorithm and then write code to deal with abstract instances of evolution, which basically equates to mathematical proof that evolution works. All that remains is to show that biological systems replicate in such a way as to satisfy the minimal criteria required for evolution to apply to them, something which has already been adequately shown time and again. At this point, we've pretty much proven that not only can evolution happen, it pretty much must happen since it's basically impossible to prevent it from happening.

by Gallade » Sat May 16, 2015 8:00 am

by Hurdegaryp » Sat May 16, 2015 8:01 am
CVT Temp wrote:I mean, we can actually create a mathematical definition for evolution in terms of the evolutionary algorithm and then write code to deal with abstract instances of evolution, which basically equates to mathematical proof that evolution works. All that remains is to show that biological systems replicate in such a way as to satisfy the minimal criteria required for evolution to apply to them, something which has already been adequately shown time and again. At this point, we've pretty much proven that not only can evolution happen, it pretty much must happen since it's basically impossible to prevent it from happening.

by Dyakovo » Sat May 16, 2015 8:01 am

by Hurdegaryp » Sat May 16, 2015 8:03 am
CVT Temp wrote:I mean, we can actually create a mathematical definition for evolution in terms of the evolutionary algorithm and then write code to deal with abstract instances of evolution, which basically equates to mathematical proof that evolution works. All that remains is to show that biological systems replicate in such a way as to satisfy the minimal criteria required for evolution to apply to them, something which has already been adequately shown time and again. At this point, we've pretty much proven that not only can evolution happen, it pretty much must happen since it's basically impossible to prevent it from happening.

by Italios » Sat May 16, 2015 8:05 am

by Hurdegaryp » Sat May 16, 2015 8:06 am
CVT Temp wrote:I mean, we can actually create a mathematical definition for evolution in terms of the evolutionary algorithm and then write code to deal with abstract instances of evolution, which basically equates to mathematical proof that evolution works. All that remains is to show that biological systems replicate in such a way as to satisfy the minimal criteria required for evolution to apply to them, something which has already been adequately shown time and again. At this point, we've pretty much proven that not only can evolution happen, it pretty much must happen since it's basically impossible to prevent it from happening.

by Bralia » Sat May 16, 2015 8:08 am

by Hurdegaryp » Sat May 16, 2015 8:09 am
CVT Temp wrote:I mean, we can actually create a mathematical definition for evolution in terms of the evolutionary algorithm and then write code to deal with abstract instances of evolution, which basically equates to mathematical proof that evolution works. All that remains is to show that biological systems replicate in such a way as to satisfy the minimal criteria required for evolution to apply to them, something which has already been adequately shown time and again. At this point, we've pretty much proven that not only can evolution happen, it pretty much must happen since it's basically impossible to prevent it from happening.

by Jute » Sat May 16, 2015 8:09 am

Italios wrote:Jute's probably some sort of Robin Hood-type outlaw
Carl Sagan, astrophysicist and atheist wrote:"Science is not only compatible with spirituality; it is a profound source of spirituality.
When we recognize our place in an immensity of light-years and in the passage of ages,
when we grasp the intricacy, beauty, and subtlety of life, then that soaring feeling,
that sense of elation and humility combined, is surely spiritual...The notion that science
and spirituality are somehow mutually exclusive does a disservice to both."
"A rejection of all philosophy is in itself philosophy."

by Italios » Sat May 16, 2015 8:10 am
Jute wrote:I think I'll gladly abstain from debates in General now and go back to the more "fun" forums
TET can sometimes be the only bright spot in this one.
Advertisement
Users browsing this forum: American Legionaries, Bradfordville, Dimetrodon Empire, Dumb Ideologies, Elejamie, Floofybit, Frokolia, Grinning Dragon, Hrofguard, Karattaria, Murab, Neo-American States, New Texas Republic, Old Tyrannia, The Astral Mandate, The Jamesian Republic, The Selkie, The United Penguin Commonwealth
Advertisement