Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!usc!sdd.hp.com!spool.mu.edu!uunet!news.larc.nasa.gov!grissom.larc.nasa.gov!kludge
From: kludge@grissom.larc.nasa.gov ( Scott Dorsey)
Newsgroups: comp.ai.philosophy
Subject: Re: computer life?
Keywords: Survival, instincts
Message-ID: <1991Mar11.165932.19507@news.larc.nasa.gov>
Date: 11 Mar 91 16:59:32 GMT
References: <1991Feb26.213835.27074@watdragon.waterloo.edu> <1991Feb27.134800.18153@news.larc.nasa.gov> <1991Feb27.150208.27855@mp.cs.niu.edu> <2179@cluster.cs.su.oz.au>
Sender: news@news.larc.nasa.gov (USENET Network News)
Reply-To: kludge@grissom.larc.nasa.gov ( Scott Dorsey)
Organization: NASA Langley Research Center
Lines: 11

In article <2179@cluster.cs.su.oz.au> carsup@extro.ucc.su.oz.au (Fisher Library support) writes:
>Has anyone any Proof that life itself was not designed? I think not.
>Remember that Scientific Knowledge is really scientific belief, and
>should be treated as such.

   We don't have any proof that life wasn't designed, but we do have proof
that it does evolve.  It's possible that random evolution isn't completely
a random process, but if so this is something that Man can't duplicate (owing
to not being omnipotent, etc.)   So it's not something we can discuss 
intelligently.
--scott