Computer Science: Difference between revisions
From ChrisWiki
Jump to navigationJump to search
No edit summary |
(only a theory) |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
'''Computer Science''' is the scientific explanation of how computers came to exist, and is the one true fact. Its archrival, "''[[e-volution]]''", claims that computers gradually and slowly "''e-volved''" from simple, useless forms, to more advanced and powerful forms. | '''Computer Science''' is the scientific explanation of how computers came to exist, and is the one true fact. Its archrival, "''[[e-volution]]''", '''which is <u>only</u> a theory''', claims that computers gradually and slowly "''e-volved''" from simple, useless forms, to more advanced and powerful forms. | ||
Computer Science explains that there was an intelligent engineer who created computers, and specially manipulated them so that they would advance in power to what we have today, and is completely correct as the following '''proof''' plainly shows. The problem with e-volution, is that there is no paper trail to show that the [[missing]] [[links]] ever existed which would have been half [[Commodore 64]], and half [[Xbox 360]]. | Computer Science explains that there was an intelligent engineer who created computers, and specially manipulated them so that they would advance in power to what we have today, and is completely correct as the following '''proof''' plainly shows. The problem with e-volution, is that there is no paper trail to show that the [[missing]] [[links]] ever existed which would have been half [[Commodore 64]], and half [[Xbox 360]]. | ||
Revision as of 23:32, 29 March 2007
Computer Science is the scientific explanation of how computers came to exist, and is the one true fact. Its archrival, "e-volution", which is only a theory, claims that computers gradually and slowly "e-volved" from simple, useless forms, to more advanced and powerful forms.
Computer Science explains that there was an intelligent engineer who created computers, and specially manipulated them so that they would advance in power to what we have today, and is completely correct as the following proof plainly shows. The problem with e-volution, is that there is no paper trail to show that the missing links ever existed which would have been half Commodore 64, and half Xbox 360.
Proof of Computer Science:
- Assume that computers "e-volved".
- Therefore there must be an infinite number of intermediary computers and freakoids that half resemble one type of computer and half resemble another type of computer.
- If there are an infinite number of computers, then they should occupy all space.
- I can see space around me not currently occupied by freak computers.
- Therefore, computers never "e-volved", proof by contradiction; Q.E.D.
