grishka- "....design evolutionary algorithms..."
seems a curious turn of phrase being as evolutionism = blind chance..
but then design would be more obvious if not for the bias against it.

stu- so you think you could design a better human eye! I don't think so.!
dawkins seemed to think that the God he says don't exist wired the eye backward, but eye scientists ,it seems, think differently.
how you can think the human eye less than wonderful, beats me.
I suspect it was even better at the beginning before the fall, and mutational build up.
and I don't read anywhere in the bible where the human eye is claimed to be superior to every other creature, in every respect. I don't think I claimed that, as my previous post clarified.   so that criticism is another straw man.
I would deduce though that adams eye was perfectly fit for its use in humans, as was everything else , since God declared all that he had made as very good.

snail- any particular thing I was supposed to have ignored [ I said snail- not the usual detractors]. I thought I answered most things, except when there are multiple bullet points.
steve on the other hand seems to make no specific arguments, but relies on ridicule, at least when answering anything I comment on.