E-volution - Revision history

Nightforge at 08:22, 5 May 2007

2007-05-05T08:22:43Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 04:22, 5 May 2007
Line 1:		Line 1:
	'''E-volution''' is the scientific explanation of how computers came to exist, and is the one true fact. Its archrival, "''[[Computer Science]]''", claims that computers were designed by an "''[[Intelligent Engineer]]''".		'''E-volution''' is the scientific explanation of how computers came to exist, and is the one true fact. Its archrival, "''[[Computer Science]]''", claims that computers were designed by an "''[[Intelligent Engineer]]''".

	E-volution explains that computers gradually and slowly e-volved from simple, useless forms to more advanced and powerful forms, as has been practically proven by years of scientific study as the following '''proof''' plainly shows. The problem with "''Computer Science''" is that there is no evidence of any kind of higher being known as the "''[[Intelligent Engineer]]''" which is alleged to have created computers and specifically manipulated them so that they would advance in power to what we have today.		E-volution explains that computers gradually and slowly e-volved from simple, useless forms to more advanced and powerful forms, as has been practically proven by years of scientific study as the following '''proof''' plainly shows. The problem with "''[[Computer Science]]''" is that there is no evidence of any kind of higher being known as the "''[[Intelligent Engineer]]''" which is alleged to have created computers and specifically manipulated them so that they would advance in power to what we have today.

	==Proof of E-volution:==		==Proof of E-volution:==
Line 8:		Line 8:
	# I don't see any "''[[Intelligent Engineer]]''" anywhere, and neither has anyone else.		# I don't see any "''[[Intelligent Engineer]]''" anywhere, and neither has anyone else.
	# No scientific test can be designed to show the existence of this alleged "''[[Intelligent Engineer]]''".		# No scientific test can be designed to show the existence of this alleged "''[[Intelligent Engineer]]''".
	# Therefore, computers never were "''Intelligently Engineered''", proof by contradiction, Q.E.D.		# Therefore, computers never were "''[[Intelligently Engineered]]''", proof by contradiction, Q.E.D.

Nightforge: Grammatical corrections, added a Criticisms section in an attempt to keep the article non-partisan

2007-05-05T08:21:49Z

Grammatical corrections, added a Criticisms section in an attempt to keep the article non-partisan

← Older revision		Revision as of 04:21, 5 May 2007
Line 1:		Line 1:
	'''E-volution''' is the scientific explanation of how computers came to exist, and is the one true fact. Its archrival, "''[[Computer Science]]''", claims that computers were designed by an "''Intelligent Engineer''".		'''E-volution''' is the scientific explanation of how computers came to exist, and is the one true fact. Its archrival, "''[[Computer Science]]''", claims that computers were designed by an "''[[Intelligent Engineer]]''".

	E-volution explains that computers gradually and slowly e-volved from simple, useless forms, to more advanced and powerful forms, as has been practically proven by years of scientific study, as the following '''proof''' plainly shows. The problem with "''Computer Science''" is that there is no evidence of any kind of higher being known as the "''Intelligent Engineer''" which is alleged to have created computers and specifically manipulated them so that they would advance in power to what we have today.		E-volution explains that computers gradually and slowly e-volved from simple, useless forms to more advanced and powerful forms, as has been practically proven by years of scientific study as the following '''proof''' plainly shows. The problem with "''Computer Science''" is that there is no evidence of any kind of higher being known as the "''[[Intelligent Engineer]]''" which is alleged to have created computers and specifically manipulated them so that they would advance in power to what we have today.

	==Proof of E-volution:==		==Proof of E-volution:==
	# Assume that computers were "''Intelligently Engineered''".		# Assume that computers were "''Intelligently Engineered''".
	# Then there should be an "''Intelligent Engineer''" somewhere.		# Then there should be an "''[[Intelligent Engineer]]''" somewhere.
	# I don't see any "''Intelligent Engineer''" anywhere, and neither has anyone else.		# I don't see any "''[[Intelligent Engineer]]''" anywhere, and neither has anyone else.
	# No scientific test can be designed to show the existence of this alleged "''Intelligent Engineer''".		# No scientific test can be designed to show the existence of this alleged "''[[Intelligent Engineer]]''".
	# Therefore, computers never were "''Intelligently Engineered''", proof by contradiction, Q.E.D.		# Therefore, computers never were "''Intelligently Engineered''", proof by contradiction, Q.E.D.


			== Criticisms of E-volution: ==
			# There is no current known mechanism for computers to be able to either reconfigure or reproduce themselves on their own, casting doubt on their ability to graduate from simple to complex forms.
			# The "''Proof of E-volution''" assumes that any ''[[Intelligent Engineer]]'' should be perceptible in the world around us, that no one has encountered an ''[[Intelligent Engineer]]'' at any point in time, and that no test can or will ever be able to provide proof of an ''[[Intelligent Engineer]]'s'' existance.

	[[Category:controversial article]]		[[Category:controversial article]]
	[[Category:Computers]]		[[Category:Computers]]

Chris: computers category

2007-03-31T02:36:39Z

computers category

← Older revision		Revision as of 22:36, 30 March 2007
Line 11:		Line 11:

	[[Category:controversial article]]		[[Category:controversial article]]
			[[Category:Computers]]

Chris at 04:32, 29 March 2007

2007-03-29T04:32:19Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 00:32, 29 March 2007
Line 9:		Line 9:
	# No scientific test can be designed to show the existence of this alleged "''Intelligent Engineer''".		# No scientific test can be designed to show the existence of this alleged "''Intelligent Engineer''".
	# Therefore, computers never were "''Intelligently Engineered''", proof by contradiction, Q.E.D.		# Therefore, computers never were "''Intelligently Engineered''", proof by contradiction, Q.E.D.

			[[Category:controversial article]]

Chris: new - (computer science:creation science::e-volution:evolution)

2007-03-29T04:20:12Z

new - (computer science:creation science::e-volution:evolution)

New page

'''E-volution''' is the scientific explanation of how computers came to exist, and is the one true fact. Its archrival, "''[[Computer Science]]''", claims that computers were designed by an "''Intelligent Engineer''".

E-volution explains that computers gradually and slowly e-volved from simple, useless forms, to more advanced and powerful forms, as has been practically proven by years of scientific study, as the following '''proof''' plainly shows. The problem with "''Computer Science''" is that there is no evidence of any kind of higher being known as the "''Intelligent Engineer''" which is alleged to have created computers and specifically manipulated them so that they would advance in power to what we have today.

==Proof of E-volution:==
# Assume that computers were "''Intelligently Engineered''".
# Then there should be an "''Intelligent Engineer''" somewhere.
# I don't see any "''Intelligent Engineer''" anywhere, and neither has anyone else.
# No scientific test can be designed to show the existence of this alleged "''Intelligent Engineer''".
# Therefore, computers never were "''Intelligently Engineered''", proof by contradiction, Q.E.D.