[Origin]

Oh please, think for  a moment.. Does the "change" in frequency allelle..." intentional or not?

Not.

How do you know?

How could it possibly be intentional?  That makes no sense.

[MrIntelligentDesign (OP)]

Oh please, think for  a moment.. Does the "change" in frequency allelle..." intentional or not?

Not.

How do you know?

How could it possibly be intentional?  That makes no sense.

It only means that you do not know and yet you and ToE quickly concluded. That is not science, that is a religion!

First, in science, you must know the two: intention or not, then, apply and conclude. That is how powerful the new Intelligent Design. It knows both and concluded.

[Bored chemist]

If we cannot scientifically define terms in science, we cannot simply explain.

I asked you to explain something.
You did not; and you did not scientifically define it  either so, for the second time.
.

What do you mean by "created" and "un-created"?

[Kryptid]

Evolution by natural selection would work whether the mutations were intentional or not. Selection pressures favor mutations that improve fitness. That will be true whether a mutation was put there intentionally or not.

[MrIntelligentDesign (OP)]

Evolution by natural selection would work whether the mutations were intentional or not. Selection pressures favor mutations that improve fitness. That will be true whether a mutation was put there intentionally or not.

In science, we do not give an un-concrete and untestable statement. Either the change that works in Nat Selec in Evolution is intentional or not, it must be tested. Science is for opposites, for both explanation and falsification, either A or B, if not, you are destroying falsification. Science is not a generilization, science is for specific and empirical. Choose which and let us test with experiment.

[Kryptid]

Vinegar mixed with baking soda will generate carbon dioxide gas, regardless of whether they were mixed on purpose or by accident. Intelligence therefore has no impact on that fact.

Science is as general or as specific as it needs to be.

If you think there is a reliable experiment that can distinguish design that is intelligent from that which is not, please tell us what it is.

[MrIntelligentDesign (OP)]

The new Intelligent Design is powerful in categorizing two extreme opposites but I need more data from COVID-19. Will you help me finish this scientific quest?

THE ORIGIN OF COVID-19: A SCIENTIFIC GUIDE Through The New Intelligent Design

As of this writing, COVID-19 had been infecting almost 400 million people and counting, had been killing over 5.5 million humans and still counting, had been destroying trillions of US dollars of economy and still going on, had been interrelating (intelligently relating or intentionally relating) from Alpha to Omicron variants and COVID-19 is causing many suicides due to lockdowns. One of the worst hit of the COVID-19 is the Tokyo 2020 Olympics, in where athletes compete each other without onlooking supporters, audiences, and customers, while the Japanese government had spent billions of US dollars in anticipation of success of the games. In addition, the Tokyo 2020 Olympics was postponed for one year due to COVID-19. So far, no one had ever shown if the COVID-19 had originated naturally (naturen) or not (intellen). To answer and solve this mystery or dilemma, science needs a universally correct scientific categorization method or technique to pinpointedly nail down the origin of the COVID-19 correctly and prevent future occurrences of destructive virus pandemic. The discoveries from the new Intelligent Design are being proposed to be used as guide in dealing and categorizing the topic of origins, especially, the origin of COVID-19.

[Kryptid]

I have merged your topics. Please do not post your personal theories outside of the "New Theories" forum.

From your article...

Take note very carefully, I would like to clarify and reiterate once again that when the new Intelligence Design <id> uses the word intelligence, as discovered through science experiment, intelligence is always being used for absolute good for existence and good for humans. Intelligence is for good only,  no exception! That  is why  in  my  original  published science  e-book  in Amazon, I did not even use the word intention/intentional to replace or use it  as  co-explanatory  word  for intelligence, since intelligence  is  always  for good.

If that is your definition of intelligence, then your definition doesn't fit well at all with the existing definitions. Besides, you would now need to define "good".

[Bored chemist]

So far, no one had ever shown if the COVID-19 had originated naturally (naturen) or not (intellen). To answer and solve this mystery or dilemma, science needs a universally correct scientific categorization method or technique to pinpointedly nail down the origin of the COVID-19 correctly and prevent future occurrences of destructive virus pandemic.

If covid was designed by an intelligent entity- whether that's a God or a "mad scientist"- then that same intelligence  would also be able to circumvent any plan put in place to " prevent future occurrences of destructive virus pandemic."
So, even if you were right, you would still be wrong.

[puppypower]

Evolution by natural selection would work whether the mutations were intentional or not. Selection pressures favor mutations that improve fitness. That will be true whether a mutation was put there intentionally or not.

Selective pressure, from nature, is an intelligent design, since this schema can lead even randomly based changes on the DNA, down specific anticipated rational paths, that have been selected in advance by the environment. For example, the Arctic Circle and the Equator both exert selective pressures on all the life that lives there. Each system of pressure anticipates specific characteristics that will be optimized out of all the possible changes a random model can generate. Darwin sensed the rational pressures that lead, while modern biology is fixated on the random changes most of which are not selected. This bias of tradition makes it hard to see the simplicity of this intelligent design.

Thick, high r-value fur/skin will always be the goal in the ArcticRegion since this is the induced potential seen by all multicellular biology systems. This goal is mediated by the water since water is the integrating feature of life. The carbon aspects of life are very diverse, but water, which accounts for the vast majority of all the molecules within life, is simple, stable and persistent. It is a fixed bookend that anchors the diversity of the carbon so it fans out a certain way as it evolves. This was an intelligent design.

This choice of water for life was an intelligent design since all the organics molecules, like alcohols, that are theorized as alternate solvents for life, can be used as fuel, metabolized and altered, thereby losing the single stable bookend that only water can provide. This stable bookend has its own potentials that create selection at the nanoscale that can interface environmental potentials at the macro-scale; fully integrated. 

Here is an interesting observation and example of the integrating potential of water; selective potential that leads evolution at both the nanoscale and macro scale. Human females typically have more body fat, while human males typically have more protein and muscle implicit of less body fat. In terms of the water, since the female body has more "oil", in terms of her water-oil or water-organic body system, one would expect more surface tension in females. This is observed and gives the entire female body a more curved and rounded appearance. Males are less curved, in comparison due to less bulk surface tension between all its organics and water. The extra reduction potential of the female is connected to the needs of growing babies. The bulk water and oil (organic) equilibrium of the female body; higher surface tension, creates sensory cues between male and female, so that can each find each other and procreate. This is an intelligent design due to the simplicity and integration of the nanoscale and macro-level.

There is an aspect of animal consciousness that I call sensory expectation.This is an intelligent design. Sensory expectation is a type of potential, stemming from the operating system of the brain; instinct. The brain sets a potential and then tells one; instinct, what is needed to impinge upon your sensory systems to lower the potential. For example, when we are hungry images of food will enter your mind based on the time of day. I had the urge to have a bagel this morning. My sensory expectation was satisfied only after I found the bagels in the bread drawer, placed it the toaster, buttered it and then brought to my computer desk, to eat; yum! The potential is satisfied for now. I think I need another coffee.

The brain's operating system has it own type of selective environment that can lead consciousness to anticipated ends that integrate it with the body's biology in the light of the selective properties of nature. All the random choices of food in my house can get narrowed down based on a sensory expectation; urge, leading me to the path needed to release the inner potential. This is an intelligent design since it can build upon itself. I may need other nutrients tomorrow, so I expect, based on trends for my sensory expectation, this will lead to cereal and milk. When the natural animal begins his search for food, they have a visualized and olfactory goal in mind or a list of possible alternative, in the case of omnivores.

Humans also have choice and free will, so we make alternate choices apart from instinctive sensory expectation. However, these choices are less satisfying and leave lingering potential. This is also a type of intelligent designed since it maintains activation energy. The drug addict is never able to release their natural sensory expectation potential and becomes more obsessed as this potential builds; downward spiral. This lower the set point of the brain's operating system leading one to an early time in human evolution; become more primitive; shaggy clothes and hunting and gathering from nature; dumpsters.

[Kryptid]

Selective pressure, from nature, is an intelligent design

You have an unusual definition of "intelligent".

[Bored chemist]

Selective pressure, from nature, is an intelligent design, since this schema can lead even randomly based changes on the DNA, down specific anticipated rational paths,

Who does the "anticipating"?

[MrIntelligentDesign (OP)]

I have merged your topics. Please do not post your personal theories outside of the "New Theories" forum.

From your article...

Take note very carefully, I would like to clarify and reiterate once again that when the new Intelligence Design <id> uses the word intelligence, as discovered through science experiment, intelligence is always being used for absolute good for existence and good for humans. Intelligence is for good only,  no exception! That  is why  in  my  original  published science  e-book  in Amazon, I did not even use the word intention/intentional to replace or use it  as  co-explanatory  word  for intelligence, since intelligence  is  always  for good.

If that is your definition of intelligence, then your definition doesn't fit well at all with the existing definitions. Besides, you would now need to define "good".

You did not finish the article that you are reading! At the end of that science article, you will see the definitions of the two. And,  are you lazy to read? Maybe, you just have no time...

[MrIntelligentDesign (OP)]

Evolution by natural selection would work whether the mutations were intentional or not. Selection pressures favor mutations that improve fitness. That will be true whether a mutation was put there intentionally or not.

Selective pressure, from nature, is an intelligent design, since this schema can lead even randomly based changes on the DNA, down specific anticipated rational paths, that have been selected in advance by the environment.

This is one of the reasons why EVOLUTION is not a real science theory. Evolution has killed falsification, by giving general explanations of reality. In science either A or B, if A then, B is falsified. Oh my goodness...

[MrIntelligentDesign (OP)]

So far, no one had ever shown if the COVID-19 had originated naturally (naturen) or not (intellen). To answer and solve this mystery or dilemma, science needs a universally correct scientific categorization method or technique to pinpointedly nail down the origin of the COVID-19 correctly and prevent future occurrences of destructive virus pandemic.

If covid was designed by an intelligent entity- whether that's a God or a "mad scientist"- then that same intelligence  would also be able to circumvent any plan put in place to " prevent future occurrences of destructive virus pandemic."
So, even if you were right, you would still be wrong.

My goal is to pinpoint the Agent who brought the COVID-19 to Wuhan market... the new ID will guide us to there.

[Bored chemist]

My goal is to pinpoint the Agent who brought the COVID-19 to Wuhan market... the new ID will guide us to there.

Probably someone like this guy.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/nov/19/first-covid-patient-in-wuhan-was-at-animal-market-study-finds

in any event, it is likely that a study like this
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Investigations_into_the_origin_of_COVID-19
will answer the question and tosh about "intelligent design" can't help.

[Kryptid]

At the end of that science article, you will see the definitions of the two.

I looked and I don't see where the word "good" is defined. Could you quote the part that does so?

This is one of the reasons why EVOLUTION is not a real science theory.

It's very much a real science theory supported by a wide range of evidence. It is also quite falsifiable (the fossil record, biogeography and patterns of genetics between species would all have been plenty enough to prove it wrong if they were, in fact, incompatible with it).

[MrIntelligentDesign (OP)]

My goal is to pinpoint the Agent who brought the COVID-19 to Wuhan market... the new ID will guide us to there.

Probably someone like this guy.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/nov/19/first-covid-patient-in-wuhan-was-at-animal-market-study-finds

in any event, it is likely that a study like this
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Investigations_into_the_origin_of_COVID-19
will answer the question and tosh about "intelligent design" can't help.

Well, what I am doing is using real science and real criteria in categorizing an X, X = COVID-19, since the new ID could generally categorize all things...

[MrIntelligentDesign (OP)]

At the end of that science article, you will see the definitions of the two.

I looked and I don't see where the word "good" is defined. Could you quote the part that does so?

This is one of the reasons why EVOLUTION is not a real science theory.

It's very much a real science theory supported by a wide range of evidence. It is also quite falsifiable (the fossil record, biogeography and patterns of genetics between species would all have been plenty enough to prove it wrong if they were, in fact, incompatible with it).

Intelligence = one problem, two or more solutions... non-intelligence = one problem, one solution... know that differences and apply that to Biology, you will end up cursing Evolution...

[Kryptid]

Intelligence = one problem, two or more solutions... non-intelligence = one problem, one solution...

Actually, I was asking how you defined "good", not "intelligence".

Also, what experiment can you perform that would support your assertion that, "Intelligence = one problem, two or more solutions... non-intelligence = one problem, one solution..."?

you will end up cursing Evolution...

I very much doubt it.