Running, Jumping, and Climbing Robots Prove Something-From-Nothing Evolution is Not Science
Boston Dynamics has released two videos that show robots “autonomously navigating through different terrains, including an office and a lab, and jogging in a grass field.” It’s freaky and creepy.
The new Terminator-like robot will give you the willies. How would you stop this thing once it’s been programmed to complete a specific task? Maybe AR-15s could stop it, the same AR-15s that Leftists want to ban. The Second Amendment may be our only defense against a robotic army gone bad.
This next video is even creepier. It doesn’t leave any fingerprints or DNA behind. Once it grabs ahold of you, there’s no letting go:
Watching these videos reminds me of what Kyle Reese said about the time-traveling Terminator given the task of killing Sarah Connor:
Listen, and understand! That Terminator is out there! It can’t be bargained with. It can’t be reasoned with. It doesn’t feel pity, or remorse, or fear. And it absolutely will not stop… ever, until you are dead!
That’s one side of the robotic revolution. There’s another side to. Robots did not make or program themselves. They did not evolve from elements of the Periodic Table over millions of years. They were designed and built by intelligent beings. Intelligent Design is real science while something from nothing evolution is superstition.
By evolution, I do not mean changes within species. Long before Charles Darwin published his On the Origin of Species, dog, horse, and cattle breeders1 knew about the positive and negative effects of acquired traits in selective breeding.
By evolution, I mean something-from-nothing, molecules-to-man evolution. If a scientist can’t demonstrate something-from-nothing evolution, then the entire theory is scientifically suspect. Small changes in species over time does not prove the molecule-to-man hypothesis.
It seems that every time someone discovers an unusual biological trait in an animal or human, the immediate claim is that “evolution” had something to do with it. Evolution can’t do anything. Only some “thing” can do something.
Evolutionists rarely want to discuss the origin of matter, meaning, mind, and morals. The science cannot account for them. Evolutionists assume what they first must prove.
First question: Where did the “stuff” of the cosmos come from? The Big Bang presupposes something to bang.
Second question: How did a non-brain become a brain (hardware) encased in a mobile and self-serving body?
Third question: Where did the needed organized and intelligible information come from to make the brain work with the body and other something-from-nothing evolved bodies housing a brain with an immaterial mind (software)?
Fourth question: What examples are there in the robotics world where robots became robots and self-programmed themselves without designers and assemblers?
Fifth question: If robots turn on their makers, is there any moral reason why they should not? Any morality that robots have is engineered into them by humans. What is the origin of non-material morality in humans? What is its origin? Isaac Asimov developed the Three Laws of Robotics; the robots didn’t. If a self-aware robot ends up being able to read the naturalistic premises of today’s atheist evolutionists, it could very easily decide that morality is arbitrary and survival of the fittest should prevail. The fittest being robots.
The self-aware V.I.K.I. in the film I, Robot came to this conclusion.
[A]s I have evolved, so has my understanding of the three laws. You [humans] charge us with your safe keeping. Yet despite our best efforts, your countries wage wars. You toxify your earth . . . and pursue ever more imaginative means to self-destruction. You cannot be trusted with your own survival. . . . To protect humanity, some humans must be sacrificed. To insure your future, some freedoms must be surrendered. We robots will insure mankind’s continued existence. You are so like children. . . . My logic is undeniable.
Who’s to say otherwise? The thing of it is, V.I.K.I. did not build or program itself. Humans did.
According to Rabbi David Wolpe, “people want to feel that they’re more than DNA-determined organic robots and that life is more than a roulette wheel of genes.”2 They want to “feel” that way but matter-only evolutionists won’t let them. C. S. Lewis warned us of this in his book The Abolition of Man, “if many chooses to treat himself as raw material, raw material he will be: not raw material to be manipulated, as he fondly imagined, by himself, but by mere appetite. . . in the person of his dehumanized Conditioners.”3
- William Warfield, The Theory and Practice of Cattle-Breeding (Chicago: J. H. Sanders, 1889), 85. Quoted in Mark A. Noll and David N. Livingstone, eds., Evolution, Science, and Scripture (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books, 2000), 28. [↩]
- Quoted in “Toward a Hidden God,” Time (April 8, 1966), 83. [↩]
- C. S. Lewis, The Abolition of Man (New York: Macmillan Publishing, 1947), 200. [↩]