Sayonara

Oh. Forget what I said about "self-evidently wrong". The inconsistent underlining made me think one of the questions was part of your reply.

"Creatures evolve to greater complexity": Not necessarily so. It's a general trend, but adaptation is not always the same as sophistication. "A human being is a collection of smaller life forms": Not true at all by current definitions of the words "human being" or "life forms". "Unused structures remain latent within the genetic coding and may be re-expressed at a later date": Yes, this needs clarification. It sounds pretty wrong to me, given the mechanisms of selection. "people are highly specialised worms": No, people are not worms of any kind. Worms are worms. Tell us who said that so we may mock them heartily. "It is the most foolish thing to think of a person as an individual organism because we can not synthesize sunlight directly, therefore are at best symbiotic": Whoever said that doesn't understand what an individual is.

http://www.scienceforums.net/forums/showthread.php?t=4022

Here's one: http://www.scienceforums.net/forums/showthread.php?t=6579

There ought to be a couple of threads on archeopteryx specifically, if you do a search. Although I think it was spelled with an annoying merged 'ae' in there, so it might not come up on search.

Yes, it's a bit crazy. Obviously you must base your opinions on something. If you don't tell us what that is, you might as well just write that you think the smell of blue is pretty. Not to mention that some of it is self-evidently wrong, and we can't do much in the way of explaining why without knowing where you got it from.

In that case it was probably accumulating without being reset, so I'd go with the 'glitch' assessment.

All states are transitional. Well, that was fun.

Yes.

How can you make that guarantee? How will you ensure your experts don't feed utter crap to paying cutomers? Who will regulate the process?

I'm surprised that you can't see the difference between two people having sex, and two people both intentionally and successfully procreating.

It was just a spike in bot traffic.

People don't "decide" to get pregnant, then have an abortion just for a laugh.

Hellbender, what are you basing all of that on? Please don't misuse the tag.

There are a couple of free 3D packages that include some excellent game engine generation capabilities. It's been ages since I've used them though, so I don't know which ones are still being developed/supported. Darkbasic is probably the best known beginner/amateur-end package.

What does your theory predict?

There are many different software solutions; some are modular, some are all-in-world. You will have to be more specific.

You have not answered my question, and I'm not convinced you want to.

lol Get a dictionary that's made out of paper.

It does. But you can't see it.

What? The fact that something outside the universe is not part of the universe?

Whoooooosh.

Because physics sets out to describe the universe, and whatever caused the big bang is outside that scope.

What's not correct? That we call white holes stars? If so, I'm aware of that - I was being oblique.

But, regarding my previous post, how does one know whether or not one has been given a "valid" answer? Your business model is severely lacking in accountability and trust.