Yes, except that computers are computers and the universe is the universe. You may as well compare apples with oranges and expect the two to possess the same features. They don't.

I've said this before, but I don't see why evolution and creationism need even oppose one another. When you say evolution is wrong, you have to pinpoint what you mean by evolution, since the definition is as broad, if not broader, than the defnition of Christianity (you have countless sects, there are even sects of Christians who believe that God is dead: a far cry from what your average Baptist priest is preaching).

I think what should be discussed in this forum is how much do you believe life can evolve on its own and how much requires intelligent intervention? For example, if you don't believe in evolution in any way shape or form how do you explain that humans have evolved into different races? That giraffes grew longer necks over millenia? That many animals have changed over generations to clearly adapt to new environments? If your reply is that they these "changes" were the intervention of a creator, then it sounds to me like you can perfectly accept evolution and creationism together, because there is no denying that giraffes have evolved, that humans have evolved, etc. The only question is how did we evolve and by who or what?

Hard core, text book definitions on most beliefs of evlotion are an entirely different subject. I'm not talking about proving or disproving whether man sprung up from a bog, turning from a single celled organism into homo sapiens over the vast millenia of time. That's not part of my point. I'm talking about small bits of evolving. Are you actually denying that these things take place? Are you denying the biological evidence that some animals have evolved to adapt to their environment?

I think most creationists vehemently oppose evolution because they fear it interferes with their beliefs. I don't see why it has to. In fact, it makes perfect sense to me that evolution would be a part of an intelligent design (certainly a lot more sense than a bunch of winged people who conveniently look just like men except they don't come from a realm where opposable thumbs or even two arms and legs are necessary and where their deity magically pointed a finger (and why does he have a finger?) and -- voila -- we just ... appeared! That part sounds like the unimaginative musings of a mythology maker to me.)

Before replying, remember: I haven't said anything against creationism. I am not writing a treatise against creation. I'm specifically and only asking why the two are not compatible.