Detecting design or intent in nature

[Heywood]

Define unambiguous in the context you're using it.

An example too broad to be evaluated. Rhythm's example of a procedural generation for instance. What specific procedural generation is he talking about? When you gave "biological evolution" as an example, I knew what you were talking about.

Procedural generation is something so broad it doesn't help us one iota to determine if something requires intellect or not. It is like "a collection of atoms". A car is a collection of atoms. Collections of atoms have been shown to exist without the need of an intellect....therefore cars do not require intellects. Of course that is ludicrous. Well we know cars do require intellects because certain kinds of collections of atoms require intellects and other kinds do not. Cars happen to be the kind of collections of atoms which require intellects.

If Rhythm wants to claim that evolution is a procedural generation and that ALL procedural generations do not require intellects to be implemented....that is fine. Let him make a case that all conceivable procedural generations do not require intellects to be implemented. Anyone with half a brain knows there are implementations of procedural generations that only exist because intellects were here to implement them.