ENIGMA Development Environment

Thanks for your help Robert. With windows version i manage to load the project without errors, but when i try to save it in a new format (egm), it  doesn't load correctly the next time i try to load it.
Would you mind to share your 'converted version' ?

Don't feed the trolls 

Otherwise they're just as bad as religious people.

I don't know, but anyway i prefer to live in a modern society than in traditional religious society. Modern societies have theirs problems of course, but in general they are far more tolerant than 'religious' societies. Robert, you said you are gay. Imagine living in some traditional countries. You would have to hide your homosexually, if you don't want to have serious troubles. It's is said that US has a very strong religious roots, but anyway for for civil rights, it's a modern society. Also you talked about Alain Turing. He was prosecuted for homosexuality in 1952, when such acts were still criminalised in the UK. In the end, he commited suicide. England, like others countries, was a much more conservative country in this period, but nowadays it's much better. We should not forget that we should feel grateful for the people who started the fight for civil rights. These people are the ones who started several centuries ago the 'age of enlightnement' and the scientific revolution. On this topic, you can still find people religious people who think homosexuals will go to hell, as it's written in their book.

I don't like seeing these words in scientific context. Because while of course people do fight new ideas, scientists are the ones who are the most open minded. They are the ones having no problems changing their understanding when new facts arise. They don't care about being "right" before, they care about being "right" right now.

That's an ideal view of science. As you are young and innocent, i will forgive your ignorance ! 
More seriously, if you read with an open mind some books about the history of science, you will find a lot of examples of what i said. One interesting example, which is rather recent : the book 'Trouble with physics' by Lee Smoolin. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Trouble_with_Physics) The author, who is a theorist in physics, explains the political war between two theories of 'quantum gravity': string theory and loop quantum gravity. He works on the loop quantum gravity, but he says none of the theory are complete, and none are really testable for the moment. He is not really against string theory, as he said this theory has also positive aspects, which are not found in the loop quantum theory. Then he explains that the string theory has more supporters than 'his' theory, but the main problem is that string theorists have got all the power. He explains that in american university, if you are a young researcher and you want to make a career in high energy physics, you have to agree with string theory, otherwise the university professors will neither accept you. He explains also that the most passionate supporters of string theory are dogmatic and neither accept any critics. He doesn't ask his theory to be the 'favorite', but he doesn't want all the power and money are given to only one theory. Of course, you will find the most passionate supporters of string theory, like Lubos Motl, saying Lee Smoolin is only an idiot. But it is really amazing ?

That's said, it's better now than in the past. In middle age, you could get burn by the inquisition if you didn't believe in their dogmas, nowadays, you get only your career screwed ! 

In science, there IS NOT DIFFERENCE between theory and fact.

TheExDeus , a theory TRIES  to explain some facts. It's just an imperfect representation of reality, and it will always be. As everybody can see science is always evolving and new theories are replacing older. So scientific knowledge is neither absolute or perfect. A famous example is with gravity. We had before the Newton theory, which were replaced by general relativity. Newton theory was not wrong but just incomplete. That's doesn't mean science is 'bogus', it's just knowledge is always incomplete and theories will never explain 100% the facts, because we always discover new facts. So i think it's a little bold to say there is no difference between theory and facts.

Also, Atheists think they don't believe in god, because they don't like this word  , but they are just not aware that they believe in their god : The rational god ! In this religion, Reason rules and explains everything, and everybody who doesn't believe in this is just an obscurantist !  (Ok, that's better than burning in hell  )

Also science is made by scientists, who are human beings like others. Not worse, but not better, with their weakness too. They fight also for power, career and fame. As i am interested by science, i read some books about history of science, and you can see how scientists very often belong to 'clans', with their 'dogmas'. Almost every time a scientist find new facts and propose a revolutionary new theory, you will find a lot colleagues who will try to ridicule not only the theory but also the 'messenger'. Why ? Because they made their career with a theory, and they just don't want anybody proposing a new theory, which would weaken their power. That's why i am so admiring big scientists, who spent their life fighting to impose new revolutionaries theories. Let's not forget the sentence of Max Planck :

A scientific truth does not triumph by convincing its opponents and making them see the light, but rather because its opponents eventually die and a new generation grows up that is familiar with it.

So true !

Concerning evolution, i take it as granted, but i am sure we have a lot of things to learn. The problem with this subject is that every time you say neo-Darwinism is not explaining everything, you will be labeled as creationist. I think mutations can explains micro-evolution, as we can see everyday with the resistance of bacteria to antibiotics, but it doesn't explain creation of whole new species (macro-evolution). I don't say it's god,  as anyway this doesn't explain anything, but there is a process, which has to be discovered which leads evolution, and this is not only natural selection. And when i am speaking about a process, i think mainly of a physical process. There was a recognized scientist, Stephen Jay Gould (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephen_Jay_Gould), who was famous for his theory of 'Punctuated equilibrium' (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Punctuated_equilibrium). This theory proposes that evolution of species seem most of the time non existing, and from time to time you have very rapid evolution. That's exciting, and nobody can really explain these facts (Neither creationists nor Darwinists). Of course you will find 'zealots', like Richard Dawkins who say darwinism can explain everything and Gould theory is not important. But i am not interested by 'zealots' 

Also the problem with evolution is that the media want us to believe that it's a black and white problem. Either you believe in the 100% bible or either you believe 100% in the Darwin theory. I don't accept this choice !  I believe in a supreme intelligence and i believe in evolution ! For example, i read a very interesting article about 'The mystery of evolution'. They speak about 12 different theories about evolution :

1. The Neo-Darwinists (Dawkins, Gould, Dennet, E.O. Wilson)
2. The Progressive Darwinists (Carrol, Jablonka, Lamb)
3. The Collectivists (Bloom, Lynn Margulis, David Sloan Wilson)
4. The Complexity Theorists (Goodwin, Kaufman, Laszlo)
5. The Directionalists (Conway Morris, Gardner, Wright)
6. The Transhumanists (Ettinger, Gibson, Kurzweil)
7. The Intelligent Designers (Behe, Dembski, Johnson)
8. The Theistic Evolutionists (Miller, Peacocke, Polkinghorne)
9. The Esoteric Evolutionists (Blavatsky, Steiner, C. Wilson, Tarnas)
10. The Process Philosophers (Whitehead, Hartshorne, Griffin)
11. The Conscious Evolutionists (Teilhard de Chardin, Dowd, Marx Hubbard)
12. The Integralists (Aurobindo, Gebser, Wilber, Combs)

So far for the two theories of evolution ! Fortunately, you can still read the article here : http://www.mcs-international.org/downloads/102_the_real_evolution_debate.pdf (Be careful, Atheists ! This article was first published in a magazine which was speaking about spirituality !    )

I guess this will speak to all the geeks here !  : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6BnPeyC7zWs

I didn't test Unity yet, but i heard it's not an easy tool to master. So i wonder if it's the ideal tool to start with.
In the following the page, you can find a description of games developing tools : http://www.pixelprospector.com/the-big-list-of-game-making-tools/
You can find some developing tools, like Construct 2 or Multimedia Fusion, for people who are not used to program.

Time-killer-games:
When i was younger, i was an atheist, because i saw only the negatives sides of religion. And it's true that when you see history of human kind and especially of religions, you see very often wars, fights for power and corruption. But that's not the fault of religions, but of human beings, who have been always weak. Anyway the same can be said for science, and scientists. A lot of energy has been spent by scientists to make more and more powerful weapons. Does that mean that science is bad ? Of course not ! Only some scientists are bad, not science in itself.
By the way, even materialist scientists should recognize that we have still a lot to learn.  In astronomy, scientists speak about dark matter and energy, and they say it's about 95 % of the universe. But they don't what are exactly dark matter and dark energy !! What of joke !    (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_matter). Also the latest theory of physics about 'everything', the string theory (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/String_theory), believes that we live in a world with 11th dimensions. But they don't much about these dimensions. What i want to say is that for sure we have still a lot to learn.
My personal feeling is that science will not be always the enemy of spirituality. In his own way it tries to discover truth, and i am sure that sooner or later it will rejoin spirituality.
Also, some of the most brilliant scientists have been believers. Of course that doesn't prove anything, but this means at least that it's not because you are believer that you are stupid (As some materialists want use to believe). I've read an extraordinary book, 'Quantum questions', which contains very large excerpts of the most famous physicists of 20th century, especially the creators of quantum physics, the physics which deals about particles. And it's really amazing, because a lot of  these excerpts seem to be written by 'mystics'. So it's funny then to read in newspapers and magazines skeptical scientists who said religions and spirituality, it's only for childish persons. Here is a good introduction about this book :
http://www.thezenspirit.com/2013/07/quantum-questions-mystical-writings-of-the-worlds-greatest-physicists/