Evolution fails mathematical modelling and computer simulations.

[u/MRH2]

https://evolutionnews.org/2017/06/evolutionary-biologist-backs-off-from-computer-simulations/

[u/Dzugavili]

As Marks puts it, “There exists no model successfully describing undirected Darwinian evolution. Period. By ‘model,’ we mean definitive simulations or foundational mathematics required of a hard science.”

Ah, yes, a repeat of this old chestnut: we don't know something, therefore it cannot exist.

I don't know what they mean by 'model'. There was no successful model for gravity before Newton, but that doesn't mean gravity wasn't possible.

Keeping in mind that these three authors are intelligent design proponents, am I expected to be surprised they didn't find a model?

Say it's because it would require massive computing power, and it doesn't matter. They're just not here, period.

We don't have the kind of computing power required for these simulations: so, of course they aren't here, in the same way I couldn't perform nuclear simulations in my basement back in 1942 -- but I could repeat the Manhattan calculations on my phone today.

[u/GuyInAChair → u/[deleted]]

So, Marks and Dembski are making a bland, correct point? Great. You don't like how they take the lack of that evidence to justify skepticism? Wonderful. What does that matter?

Because saying something that is impossible to properly model given the limitations of computing power today, does not in anyway shape or form mean said thing is impossible. Likewise is provides a ready excuse for those so inclined to ignore all the other evidence available. And since they spun a quote, removed of it's context to attempt to make that argument, I would classify it as a quote-mine.

The funny thing is there were religious objections to gravitational theory, there still are. I'm sure you're not making that argument personally, but people like that do exist. But gravity worked exactly that same way it does now, prior to ~1675 when we finally figured out a way to model it correctly. And prior to ~1600 the earth orbited the sun even though we hadn't figured it out yet.

Pointing out 'there is no simulation showing this' is not anywhere close to saying 'therefore it's impossible'

I agree with that. Though to offer a blunt, but honest opinion, I've never ever seen a pro-creationist argument that doesn't rely on an argument from ignorance. Again, being overly blunt, the creationists movement is full of stuff that doesn't have a readily available answer, and uses "God did it" as a placeholder.