Detecting design or intent in nature

[Chas]

Biological evolution is a subset of Heywood systems so conclusions drawn about all Heywood systems would apply to biological evolution as well.

That sounds truish, but you have once again missed the point.

Call all Heywood systems the set H. Call biological evolution and anything isomorphic to it set E. Call all of your examples set X.

Set X and set E are not identical as set E includes replication.

Your set X is a subset of set H, as is set E. You cannot prove something for members of the subset X and say it applies to all of set H.

Further implementations of biological evolutionary systems have been observed requiring intellects. Craig Venter's creation of Mycoplasma Laboratorium started to evolve.

So what? Something created evolved.

Yes it is almost identical to the biological system which is responsible for you and me but it is not the same system as the one responsible for you and me.

The key word being 'almost'.

Now it is a fact that all evolutionary systems(including biological ones) whose origins are known have all required intellects. To continue to believe that the evolutionary system which is responsible for you and me some how did not require an intellect requires a special pleading.

No, it doesn't. See above.