Intelligent Reasoning

Promoting, advancing and defending Intelligent Design via data, logic and Intelligent Reasoning and exposing the alleged theory of evolution as the nonsense it is. I also educate evotards about ID and the alleged theory of evolution one tard at a time and sometimes in groups

Friday, September 06, 2013

Alan Fatboy Fox calls me chubs!

Alan Fox is one obese fuck so when he called me chubs I lost my breakfast from laughing so much. He called me chubs because I exposed his ignorance again and that is all he could muster as a come-back.

Life is good and Alan is still an obese and ignorant fuck

Thursday, September 05, 2013

Earth to Elizabeth Liddle- Give Up as You Are Totally Clueless

Talk about pathetic- Lizzie Liddle is trying to shoot down Meyer's "Darwin's Doubt" but instead she proves that she is just a clueless loser.

Lizzie- Phyla does NOT refer to cladsitics- Meyer is referring to Linnean classification you ignorant ass. And in Linnean classification Meyer is correct- and BTW he is supported by evolutionists, strange that you forgot to mention any of that in your ignorant-laced post.

Also the nested hierarchy observed by Linneaus was and still is based on a common design. Linnean classification has nothing to do with common descent.

Meyer's point is quite simple, which is why it was lost on you. And it was stated by Roger Lewin in Science (from page 41 of "Darwin's Doubt"):
Several possible patterns exist for the establishment of higher taxa, the two most obvious of which are the bottom-up and top-down approaches. In the first, evolutionary novelties emerge, bit by bit. The Cambrian explosion appears to conform to the second pattern, the top-down effect.

That means that, as Meyer said, species come first and Phlya would be the higher taxa. Each new characteristic is added as the tree is ascended, until you have major branches that have some number of shared characteristics (also the basis for Cladistics).

Lizzie proves she knows nothing:

So when a phylum, or a class, or even a kingdom first diverges from a single population into two lineages, the “morphological distance” from the other lineage will be very short.

LoL! SPECIES diverge, Lizzie- you know populations. So when that first SPECIES/ population splits, you now would have two different species and one genera that contains those two species.

One species/ population, even if its the only one, wouldn't warrant a classification any higher than species. And unless it was capable of classifying itself it wouldn't know nor care.

Then Lizzie total blows it as she accuses Meyer of not understanding the difference between "Phyla" and "Phylum" and yet his usage in the book is correct.

What is wrong with you Lizzie? Oh that's right, she is totally confused wrt biological classifucation schemes and she thinks her ignorance means something.

Richie Tardboy Hughes- Ignorant of Evolution

Earth to Richie Tardboy Hughes- evolution can occur without universal common descent being true. IOW you are proud to be an ignorant asshole and it shows.

Richie sez:

Man is quite a clever problem solver. We use pattern recognition, intelligence and exogenous information to design these classes of models. They do okay, but apparently (emperically) not as well as GAs, which without our intelligence (or hubris or preconceptions) find novel ways to build explanatory frameworks.

GAs area tool that man made. Therefor anything it does traces back to us. GAs are an example of intelligent design evolution. There is nothing about GAs that support unguided/ blind watchmaker evolution.

Back to the point of the OP- Richie spews:

If you think evolution is okay but was initially configured, don’t be upset with Lenski or Tiktaalik’s location.  

LoL! Lenski supports baraminology and you are the one who is upset with Tiktaalik's location as it upsets your position's scheme. Also evolution can occur without universal common descent. IOW you are nothing but a grand equivocator and a coward.

 If you despise all things evolution (and you do, poster child for ID is simply upset with evolution) then also be upset with Eureqa’s outperformance. 

Again only a moron faggot would think that ID is anti-evolution and here is Richie tardboy Hughes. And Eureqa is a designed program. Meaning it wouldn't exist and couldn't do anything without us. Everything it does traces back to humans. It is a designed thing doing what it was designed to do.

The botton line is GAs are design all the way down.

Wednesday, September 04, 2013

Genetic & Evolutionary Algorithms and Intelligent Design

Genetic & evolutionary algorithms are programs designed to solve problems. The point being is if someone designs a program to do something, and it does it, it did it by design and not by blind and undirected processes.

Natural selection does not have a goal. Unguided evolution does not have a goal. Genetic drift does not have a goal. Both genetic and evolutionary algorithms have goals-> that is their whole freaking purpose. And that means they ain't like the biological evolution spewed by the likes of Darwin, Mayr, Dawkins, Coyne, et al.

And that means peope like Richie Tardboy Hughes is a lying piece of shit fathead coward for trying to pass of GAs and EAs as evidence for evolutionism.

Richard T Hughes- Proudly Willfully Ignorant

As if that needed to be said- it is clear that all evos are proudly willfully ignorant. But anyway-

Richie Tardboy Hughes has a new post over on the septic zone:

Evolution Trounces Intelligent Design

But the post pertains to a program that runs intelligent design evolution and has nothing to do with unguided evolution.

Even Richie says so but is too stupid to grasp it:

Eureqa evolves and breeds solutions to problems using genetic structures for equations and culls bad ones based on fitness – how well the equation explains known data.

Nice own goal there dumbass...