on the possibility that pattrens are not innate

Observed patterns in a body of data are normally attributed to the data source, taken as reflective of its nature.  Such inference would be proper in the case where all the spewed data is acquired by its reader.  Alas If one allows for a less than perfect detection probability then it can be shown that all observed patterns may be due to a particular data acquisition dynamics.  In fact a perfectly random source of data can be read as a source of any desired data pattern by allowing for a matching data acquisition dynamics.  The only required assumption is that the likelihood to capture and detect a piece of data increases with the increased history of reading the same data.  By applying this ‘familiarity distinction’ over a hierarchy of data readers it figures that the incidental starting pattern taken from the random source will evolve into a durable pattern wrongly attributed to that source.  This result suggests that our science and grasp of reality is due to the happenstance history of data acquisition drawn from the inanimate processes of data absorption, through the evolved particularity of the same along the Darwinian evolutionary ladder.  It also suggests that any serious attempt to see beyond our narrow tunnel of vision will have to involve a roll-back of the steps that so narrowed our vision.