RE: Richard Dawkin's big blunder
March 14, 2014 at 4:44 pm
(This post was last modified: March 14, 2014 at 4:45 pm by Heywood.)
(March 14, 2014 at 3:23 pm)Esquilax Wrote: How would one go about proving a negative like that? That's the problem I'm having; to ask if this is demonstrable sans target would mean that you're presuming you've seen evolution happening naturally with a target, something that needs to be demonstrated in itself.
Here is the product of an evolutionary system that is known to have utilized targets(specifically 1:38 on).
The behavior is indistinguishable from this product of an evolutionary system which is asserted by some to be completely blind or sans targets.
Why should I believe that assertion given that evolution with targets has been demonstrated while evolution without targets has not?
