seems to me , dmcg, that you misrepresent what I say, but maybe I am unclear. I think we agree that Darwin was big on natural/artificial collection. and he meticulously recorded his findings. I have no argument with that, nor do I think most all creationists do. however, he falsely extrapolated pond scum to people evolution from that. I only got about 1/4 way through origins before getting bogged down and bored. I do remember though, that he was a whole lot less definite than this mudcat crowd about it, admitting that his theory could be otherwise interpreted.
what he recorded from observation, is not the same as what he claimed, or more so modern darwinists, claims, and the two ie, the observed, and the extrapolated, as though the same thing. neither was Darwin the first to write about it.so Darwinist mechanism is somewhat of an exageration.
I obviously can not say too much about Darwin applied to computers, except to suggest that what very clever things being accomplished, appears to equate [ if such equasion is even plausible] to natural selection, rather than microchip to the self conscious computer some scientists may dream of. so, it seems to me that the point you claim to have made , is not as you suppose.
stu, not ignoring you, but off out now, and have been busy.