DNA Proves Existence of a Designer

[Angrboda]

Yes, thank you, but I don't see either of your claims that I am interested in confirmed in the page you linked me with.  You claimed that projects such as OpenWorm were the original impetus for and substance of the view that the brain is a material process.  You also claimed that the simulated c. elegans just sits there.  A claim I'm already finding statements contrary to your assertion regarding.  Please provide a citation(s) that support those claims.  The one you supplied does not appear to do so.  Am I overlooking a specific part of that page?  If so, please supply us with the relevant quote from the article.

Their original goal of replicating C elegans as a virtual organism was a complete flop, and they have tried to justify some of their spending by uploading it's synthetic brain into a lego robot, and all it did was crash into a wall. So now all they have is some stupid computer simulation model of the worm, billions and billions of dollars later.

Here is some more information regarding the AI project, but what I linked you initially was their own website.
 https://www.skeptic.com/reading_room/art...gone-awry/
https://ideas.ted.com/the-fascinatingly-...tual-worm/

Well, thank you for the additional information, but I am still not finding confirmation of your claims. As noted, I did not find any on the original page you linked me to, so if it is there, or anywhere on that site, you will need to quote it and link me to it. Otherwise I'm going to have to conclude that the link you gave does not support your claims. The first of the new links you provided, while fascinating, doesn't provide confirmation of either of the claims I previously mentioned, either. In particular, it explicitly says that a complete model of c. elegans had not yet been achieved. The article dates to around 2006, and so that fact is not surprising, but it doesn't support your claim, either. The second article you link to actually contradicts your claim by pointing out that a robotic embodiment of the model, whose limitations are unclear, did not simply sit there, but crashed into a wall, backed up, and moved away. So you're 0 for 3 so far. This doesn't seem to be trending in a good direction. Do you have any actual confirmation of the two claims I discussed in my prior post?