Richard Dawkin's big blunder

[Mudhammam]

Of the assumptions I consider the following are two of them.

1)It is logically possible all evolutionary systems are the product of intellect.
2)It is logically possible that not all evolutionary systems are the product of intellect.

One of those assumptions is true and one is false. You assume, for no reason whatsoever other than it conforms with your pre-existing world view that 2 is true and 1 is false.....which is faulty thinking.

I start out from a position of indifference and ask what can I observe that will give me cause to believe one assumption over the other. Well I can observe the inception of an evolutionary system that hasn't required the involvement of an intellect. That would prove to me 2 is true. I look for such things...but can't find them. I ask you guys to give me examples of such and the results are the sound of crickets.

What in God's unholy name are you talking about? Everything besides the creations of mankind are the examples you seek. Evolution by way of natural selection (hint: no intellect involved) has been observed. It is observed everyday. Creationists commonly refer to it as "micro-evolution" ...which is how speciation (macro-evolution) gets accomplished.