RE: Detecting design or intent in nature
January 21, 2015 at 3:07 pm
(This post was last modified: January 21, 2015 at 3:08 pm by Heywood.)
(January 21, 2015 at 2:56 pm)Rhythm Wrote: He can't kick a 40, so he places the ball on the 15...lol. You're still wrong, and for the same reasons as before (factually inaccuracy and logical invalidity). There are still examples of your "evolutionary systems" that have no requirement of intellect, and we are still confusing the presence of involvement with a requirement of involvement.
Except that I am right. Every time you observe an evolutionary system and find it required intellect for its implementation, and never observe an evolutionary system which did not require intellect for its implementation....it increases the likelihood that all evolutionary systems require intellect for their implementation.
Rhythm instead of just asserting that I am wrong. Perhaps you can provide a specific example.....like Julia has.....that can be evaluated. Stay away from nebulous weasel examples like "procedural gens" which can mean anything.