Is ID falsifiable by any kind of experiment?

It's not a religion.Instead of writing nonsense about evolution, maybe a better strategy would be to tell us about what scientific breakthroughs have been discovered by ID using actual science. You need actual supporting evidence, not made up CRAPOLLA like CIFA and intellen X and UBL, that no one has ever heard of, except for you. Can you even tell us what tests do you apply to measure changes in allele frequency in a population of organisms?

Google doesn't even want to search for "Biological Interrelation". It wants to search for "biological interaction", which is a real thing. If I insist on searching for "biological interrelation", it comes up with ONE book, Sayonara Theory of Evolution, Hello Biological Interrelation. The author, Edgar A. Postrado, seems to be a civil engineer - not a biologist.You seem to be a very, very, very long way from anything resembling a replacement for the ToE.

In this specific context, it is impeding people from accepting reality (by definition, a mental illness). You recognize seeing pink elephants as a mental illness; why don't you recognize the inability to see elephants as the same illness?

I believe that is our MrID. What google finds is the self-published book he was hawking.

quote:

---

As the title suggests, this science book is about the Scientific Arguments of the new Intelligent Design, as initially and originally written for submission for many secular science journals. The original manuscripts were submitted to science journals, but the journals failed to publish the science articles.

---

Just like Kleinman, Postrado is a self important fraud.

IOW, he is the only other person in the entire universe who spouts the same nonsense as he does.Point made and set.

I knew too that since cell and its members have many Repair mechanisms, then, they are the evidences that the cell is intellen, or intelligently designed, showing further that Evolution is really stupid.There are only two possibilities: that I am wrong or they are. I think they are, since they could never define intelligence and use that in Biology. Showing further that those who supports Evolution are intellectually dumb. Dumb, because they did not know the topic of intelligence.That is why, I think that Evolution is a religion.. since how could a 160 years old theory could never define intelligence or instinct... stupid Evolution, right?

I understand Evolution, I understand science, I understand reality. You, you did not understand both science and reality.

Everything that we have seen you write say the exact opposite.Yet again, reality contradicts you.You really need to learn something. Actually, you need to learn a lot.

I will repeat that I do not care about the stupid explanations of Evolution about mutation or natural selections, since they are all wrong anyway. WHY WRONG? Because Darwin did not have criteria between control to un-control change in frequency alleles. That is stupidity.I did not say frequency alleles, I said change in freq alleles, and I do not care. Evolution is wrong anyway.Interrelation, from Biological Interrelation uses intelligence to deal with life and living organisms.
The main mechanism is Intelligent Selection, and not Natural Selection. Nature does not select.

You forgot that Evolution is wrong because Evolution has no basis of its explanations in science. WHAT BASIS? The basis of change.Evolution must have criteria or basis of change, if not, Evolution is wrong and dumb.WHERE is that basis? None! Thus, Evolution is a religion.

Evolution is religion since it has no answer for two opposing extremes opposites in Biology. Creationism was kicked out in science since Creationism cannot tell which is created X and un-created X. The same with Evolution, Evolution must be kicked out in science.The FIRST breakthrough is the definition of intelligence, that all definitions, as written in all dictionaries, in all formats, in all languages, must be changed and replaced. The correct one is from my discovered definition.TEST for what change? There are many changes in biological world, and if you are asking the transitional change to become new species, then, Evolution must answer that first. I had just submitted that falsification paper in science journals for that, since Evolution has no test for that.Care to answer, or give up?

DEFEAT me first in science, then, I will agree with you.Amazon.com

How do they evidence intelligence? Specifically. Physically. What are their specific properties you say denote intelligence? We already know the answer to that. They are not wrong.Again you rage on evolution instead of supporting your own work. Is your work that bad? Must be since you can't explain it adequately.

Fool. Science already DEFEATED you! Rejected your papers and sent you packing.

The problem is you don't even know what mutations or natural selection are, much less what any theory says about them. There's no such thing as frequency alleles. That is something you made up. There's no such thing as freq alleles, either. You don't even know what Evolution says, so how can you know it is wrong? Based on what evidence? What are the criteria you are using?