Detecting design or intent in nature

[bennyboy]

But what if everything is a cat, but we are just calling them other names?

My real name is cattyboy, but shhhh. Don't tell Heywood, or he'll accuse me again of assuming all non-cats aren't cats. Then, I'll cry.

---

No, shit-for-brains. I know animals other than cats exist because I've seen them. And I know evolutionary systems which are not man-made exist, because biological evolution is not man-made.

I agree that animals other than cats exists...so lets stop talking about that. I agree that evolutionary systems which are not man made exists....so lets stop talking about that. These are straw man arguments.

Consider the following propositions:
Proposition 1: all initial implementations of the process of evolution require intellects.
Proposition 2: all initial implementations of the process of evolution do not require intellects.

There is observational evidence to support proposition 1. There is no observational evidence to support proposition 2. Why should anyone believe proposition 2?

You are persistent, I'll give you that.

Your evidence is bullshit, because you are equivocating between different kinds of evolutionary systems. We know why man-made ones require intellects: because they are man-made. Any system not man-made is not known to require intellect, because we do not know of any other intellect who could act as an agent for the creation of evolutionary systems, and nothing about those systems indicates that an intellect "implemented" them.

As for proposition 2: nobody is asserting anything about the source of evolutionary systems-- or at least I'm not. You keep parrotting about straw-manning, but I've shown you explicitly on at least 2 occasions that I am not making assumptions or assertions about evolution, and yet you keep trying to make me take the BOP for a position I'm not taking. I'm only explaining why your supporting evidence fails the basic rules of evidence.

Let me make this crystal clear. I doubt you'll read it, or respond sensibly, but at least I can QFT it. I'm agnostic. I don't hold a strong position for or against the existence of God. I accept that God may have created everything, and that everything could be the mind of God. This is one of the views of reality that I consider worth addressing, at least philosophically. I don't know where the universe came from, and why it has biological, or any other, kind of evolution. But none of this makes your evidence for design or intellect anything but a set theory fail.