Detecting design or intent in nature

[Heywood]

So now we can call anything we like evolution, demonstrate that humans make it, then real evolution is therefor due to an intelligence?

If only actual science was this easy boys.

"Evolution" is just a label so yes we can call anything we like "evolution". But if you don't want to use that term....that is fine. Lets call any system which contains the following elements a "Heywood System". Those elements are replication, heritable traits, change, and selection. Now I have observed different Heywood Systems and in each case where the origin of the system was known, the Heywood System required intellect to be implemented. Now given those observations I have reasonably concluded that it is likely all Heywood Systems require intellects.

Is biological evolution a Heywood System? Well yes it is because it contains the elements of replication, heritable traits, change, and selection. It satisfies the definition of Heywood System and therefore it is a Heywood System. Since it is likely that all Heywood Systems required intellect to be implemented it must also be likely that biological evolution required intellect to be implemented. To conclude otherwise would be to make a special pleading fallacy.

Now you can falsify the conclusion that it is likely that biological evolution required an intellect to be implemented by showing that it does not satisfy the definition of a Heywood System. Or you can falsify the conclusion by presenting an observation of a Heywood System which did not require an intellect to be implemented.

Playing games like Chas is playing...."oh you are not using my definition so you arugment is false"......doesn't really help you. If you want to refute my argument, you have to use my definitions otherwise you are just straw manning....like Chas.