Reply to comment

Darwinism is a good framework to tackle the problem of evolution, but it may be incomplete thus far. If you ever tried to resolve an extremal problem in physics (like finding minimum energy states) through a computational method like a Monte Carlo simulation, you will know one thing: high-dimensional spaces are slow to explore. (Hint: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quasi-Monte_Carlo_methods_in_finance ).

Darwinism is an extremal multi-dimensional method to evolve the species. Dimension in Darwinism means every different possibility available to a life being to evolve. And that number is really huge even for the simplest case of a cell even a virus. Nature has the advantage that may perform a Monte Carlo cycle really fast (possible less than a nanosecond) and it also has millions of years to spend in doing these cycles. On the other hand, computers also complete cycles very fast (10 GFlops implies 1 cycle per nanosecond) and today supercomputers are crunching numbers for months to solve just one problem. The fact is that currently huge-dimensional extremal problems cannot be resolved successfully no matter how powerful the supercomputer you use.

Conclusion: maybe some day scientists will realize that the Darwinist Natural Selection is not enough fast to explain life evolution. And here is exactly the point where Creationism makes sense.