Summations Only

Life is full of examples showing intelligence. Man himself is the biggest. I quote from my work http://www.sleepgadgetabs.com: "Am I legitimized to base my hypothesis on the idea of nature’s innate intelligence and what I mean by it?"Intelligence: I don’t give it the original meaning of the word (namely, to choose between contingent alternatives). What I really mean is: in response to environmental and other factors, a naturally inside organism pre-existing mechanism, and by force of chemistry and physics, causes changes in the genome. So I think of it as a mechanism, but not intelligence in any traditional sense. Of course we have then the eternal question to face here: how was this made?" But this is a second level question.I don’t think there is any need to find proofs for existence of such intelligence. It is so abundant around us. It doesn’t necessarily imply a Designer, but it can’t also of course preclude it.J. Shapiro talks about such intelligence inside cells.From Guenter Albrecht-Buehler and Robert Laughlin Rea work on CELL INTELLIGENCE I quote:My experimental work during the past 30 years suggests that single tissue cells have their own data- and signal-processing capacities that help them control their movements and orientation. Cells can seemeasure space and time and must be able to derive abstract data from physical signalsI would like to have the opinion of EvC Forum members.Edited by Admin, : Fix typos, punctuation, formatting.Edited by zi ko, : No reason given.

It seems to me an easy way to ascape from the problem.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

When man sees is doing just the same: he is interacting with environment. If man or an animal is intelligent why not a cell could not be? I don't equate God with nature. I just don't want to explain everything. Science will give ,or not,
the answer of whow universal laws of matter and energy gave life and where it's innate tedency to self preservation, which is materialised by it's intelligence came from. U p to then all is amatter of personal choice and belief.

No it is not. I have given the definition in O.P

Your examples are not of analogue level to intelligence. it would be fair to use exaples of the type: If an animal can see, feel hot , danger ect, why not a cell MY only reason is only reason.

I quote from
Review
Mobile DNA and evolution in the 21st century
James A Shapiro
"
Molecular cell biology has uncovered sophisticated networks in all organisms. They acquire information about external and internal conditions, transmit and process that information inside the cell, compute the appropriate biochemical or biomechanical response, and activate the molecules needed to execute that response. These information-processing networks are central to the systems biology perspective of the new century. Altogether, we have a radically different conceptual perspective on living organisms than our predecessors. As a result, we need to ask how this new perspective affects our 21st century understanding of the evolutionary process. Posing this question and outlining a provisional answer are the goals of this review. .....Barbara McClintock: thinking about genome change as a cognitive response to challenge
In addition to the discoveries of molecular biology, our 21st century thinking benefits from another major strand of 20th century research - McClintock's cytogenetic studies that led her to recognize the internal capabilities cells possess to repair and restructure their genomes. Starting in the 1930s with X-ray-induced chromosome rearrangements, she analysed how maize cells dealt with broken ends. These studies taught her that maize had the ability to detect broken ends, bring them together and fuse them to generate novel chromosome structures, including deletions, inversions, translocations......"
Do you still think innate intelligence is an undetectable mechanism ...ect?

I advise you to read my O.P. You will see there that cells can "see" "measure" ect

Iam not trying to convince anybody. Only to make people to think that there are others as well routes of thinking. In any case my work is hypothetical if you remember.

Why do you insist on sayng the same thing? I already had accepted that man too reacts to environment when he sees ect. Don't we say the same thing? Didn't i defined intelligence, as i mean it?--------------------------------------------------------------------------------Edited by zi ko, : No reason given.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ihad given the needed definition. What is so confusingabout?

I put it in the order the eminent scientist have written it. Don't change please what i have said.

I t could be this way. But you then have to proceed a bit further.
as: chemical and mechanical phenomena from environment can regulate evolution.

There is here a tedency to oversimplification and using exambles no analogues to each other.That offspring does not rely only to mutation rate in its evolution. It is memory, decisin making, repairing, ineraction between information units,etc. Thinking is clearly a human characteristic, but grades of it is met to animals, even lower ones, as well.--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Oversimplification and inappropriate using of analogues.Edited by zi ko, : No reason given.

It is all a matter of complexity.