Detecting design or intent in nature

[Heywood]

Sorry Benny....it is you who is the idiot because you assume that evolutionary systems whose origins are unknown did not need intellect to be implemented. I hope your daughter does not grow up begging the question as much as her father does.

Does "may or may not" sound like an assumption to you? Not if you speak English, it doesn't. I've made neither assumption nor assertion-- I've only pointed out that the way you are using observations about one kind of thing do not serve as meaningful evidence for another kind of thing. Now, you're not only bad with set theory, you're also a liar.

If all of your observations turn out to be one kind it suggest that there is only one kind. Like I said....you assume the "other animals" are not cats. You assume what you want to believe to be true. The truth is there may not be any other animals....if you only observe cats and mice....that's probably all there is.

---

Ahem.

No, but you're missing out the crucial element of reproduction.

Replication via reproduction is replication. I am not missing it.

You have given no reason why reproduction is a special case of replication to such a degree that it should be treated differently from other forms of replication.