It seems more to me that you were responding to people criticising a different program that was even worse as a simulation.
It certainly was not. Perhaps you would like to show how things that are not designed cannot have “unselected steps” ? Are you perhaps suggesting that unintelligent processes recognise and intentionally avoid unselected steps?
This is the usual error of using an a priori probability after the fact. The probability of following a particular path after it has happened is simply not relevant.