Detecting design or intent in nature

[bennyboy]

Pretty unambiguous situation here, though you're going to cry like a baby and run in circles until you've made yourself so dizzy that you think you've changed the world's spin, and not change the tag after all. Thought I'd give you a chance not to be a squirmy liar-- a chance which I predict you will voluntarily surrender in 3. . . 2. . . 1. . .

All non-triangle polygons is not all polygons. Remember the challenge is to find something true of all polygons which is not true for all triangles. Keep trying....if you ever do succeed, I will put "moron" next to my name. You don't have to do anything, the fact that you put so much effort into it so far was enough of a reward for me.

oic more semantics. Fine.

"All polygons" is a Big Set, by your definition of the workings of logic. It's a Big Set which includes squares. Triangles do not include squares. Therefore something that is true of the set of all polygons is not true of triangles. Except, that is, in Heywood Land, where every triangle is proof that all polygons are triangles.