Methinks It Is Like A Weasel

[charlie]

That's the phrase used in Dawkin's famous computer program, commonly known as WEASEL. He wrote it nearly 25 years ago and it's confounded William Dembski and his crew for the past 10.

I've wanted to see it working, but most versions available are executables in Java, Python, or somesuch, stuff I don't want to bother with. I found a couple of implementations in Javascript, but didn't like their presentation. You couldn't easily track changes in the scrolling, dancing character jumbles.

So, here's mine. You'll need Javascript enabled in your browser to use it:

http://charlieatdu.x10hosting.com/weasel.html

---------

Some of the Dawkins/Dembski backstory for those who haven't heard it:

(If this is too windy to read, here's a gleefully snarky summation from PZ Myers. And another.)

WEASEL is Dawkin's response to the monkey/typewriter/Shakespeare problem, a popular criticism of evolution. Described in The Blind Watchmaker, it demonstrates how cumulative selection can drastically shorten the eons random mutation needs to achieve a complex result.

Dembski has misunderstood and mischaracterized this program for close to a decade, even after he's been corrected innumerable times.

He insists that it uses positional lock-in. That is, once a correct letter in the right position occurs, it's exempt from mutation. This is wrong. ALL letters in ALL positions can mutate ANYTIME, there is no lock-in. The only measure of fitness is the total number of correct letters/positions. So, in Dawkin's program, this:

xxASEL

would be deemed fitter and would replace this:

WExxxx

which can't happen in Dembski's imaginary program.

When shown a 1987 documentary that includes a segment where you can SEE characters flipping in and out of match, Dembski's surmised that Dawkins may have used a program with a different algorithm. Yes, one for the book and one for the TV show. Uncommon Descent even issued an open call for sleuths who could track down the source code for both.

It seems to have escaped him that if Dawkins deliberately switched algorithms to bumfuzzle his future nemesis, the program in the documentary STILL converged on the target in minutes.

For over a year he and a partner have been working on a project called WeaselWare, promising software that'll deconstruct Dawkin's program. Even though WEASEL itself is a piffle that can be bashed out in no time, they still haven't released a scrap of code. Screen caps from another forensic work on another evolutionary program show that they're using Javascript. They must be taking all-day lunches.

[Orrex]

1. That's awesome! You should email Dawkins to let him know!

I'm sure he'd love to have a zillion people proving his argument via your application!

Honestly, though I've read Watchmaker, I was stunned to see just how quickly the program can generate a complex sequence. My first run-through with the default settings took about 160 generations, with only 50 offspring per generation. If you up it to 500 offspring, the sequence is achieved in just 36!

That's a wonderful destruction of the stupid argument that scientists have failed to produce life in a beaker, since that argument always ignores the reality of Earth's initial "experiment" and the number of attempts that could have been made before success.

I know of several Creationist loons who seriously need to take a look at your program!

[charlie]

2. Thank you very much Orrex!

I'm sure Dawkins has an email bin full of WEASEL variants in every language, though. This would be just one more for the pile.

WEASEL is certainly nifty to watch and confirms what anyone with a clue suspects. But God Himself would have to whack a creationist with a 2X4 to dislodge his certainty it's a trick. William Dembski is degreed up the wazoo. He's a mathematician, he's capable of rigorous thinking. Yet, for a decade he's held fast to a goofy error in implementation to discredit Dawkin's original program. That's some serious devotion to dogma.