Is ID falsifiable by any kind of experiment?

I can share the new model, to those who are really serious in science.

That was an old video. I improved a lot and now AronRa was very afraid of me. WHY? Click below:Amazon.com

That was ugly. But I did like one of the comments.Review title:
"Almost incomprehensible, written by a semi-literate buffoon"Content:
"Although the author tortures the English language, he unfortunately does not force it to reveal anything."

No, he's not. He will feel the same about you that we all do, which is a strong degree of concern as to your mental wellbeing.As I've said before Edgar, seek professional help. It will do you the world of good.

That made me laugh - a lot !

Give it a try. But I doubt that you have anything recognizable as a model.

There comes a point where continuing discussions with people who are obviously 'not quite right' is abuse

Remember that I had been debating the followers of Evolution for many years. And the best way of revenge to them is to buy my science books and give negative reviews. Anybody can do that.But a real critic of science will surely must know the topic, the basis and the explanation - and fight model vs model. In my case, the topic of intelligence, that all of critics that have no idea with.That is why, I am still the winner.

Yeah, supporters of Evolution are not correct and right. How could they explain reality in biological world without knowing unguided to guided X? They are asking me to use tell, well, know first, then tell here or write science book and give us the link.Thus, Evolution had made them stupid.

AronRa is very afraid of me intellectually. I had been calling him in Atheist Experience to fight me in science, since I told him that I wrote a book for his Phylogeny Challenge, but he was very afraid.Do you wanna help him?I think that you should go to mental hospital for you cannot define and explain the topic of intelligence. You went to schools too, right?

False. It is evidence. It includes OBSERVATIONS!!!! You continue to avoid the evidence, as expected.I also explained how we know that mutations aren't guided. Here it is again:"For example, in the plate replica experiment we see that mutations that confer antibiotic resistance are not triggered by the presence of antibiotics. Instead, there are random mutations changing DNA without guidance, and some of those mutations just happen to produce antibiotic resistance."If mutations were guided then nearly all of the mutations in the experiment would confer antibiotic resistance once the bacteria are exposed to antibiotics, but that's not what happens. The mutations happen randomly with respect to fitness. In other words, mutations are blind to the needs of the organism. That is what makes them unguided. That's the entire point of science. You follow the evidence to a conclusion, and throw away the conclusions that aren't supported by evidence. You are the one who doesn't understand how science works. You seem to think science is just believing whatever you want to. That's not how it works. What dividing line is that? I guess you never heard of shades of gray?What we do have is a measurement of how many photons are reflected or emitted by an object, and the wavelength of those photons. The problem is that you can't seem to understand the differences between empirical measurements, opinions, and beliefs. Evolution has answered that question. I have been giving you those answers for multiple posts now. Follow your own advice.For example, what is a freq allele or a frequency allele? Why can't you answer that question?

We do know it. It's been defined since the 1940's.MUTATIONS OF BACTERIA FROM VIRUS SENSITIVITY TO VIRUS RESISTANCE | Genetics | Oxford AcademicREPLICA PLATING AND INDIRECT SELECTION OF BACTERIAL MUTANTS - PMC

You don't have a model, and you don't know what science is. Even worse, you don't understand what the theory of evolution says, what evidence it is based on, how evolution defines guidance (even though I've shown you multiple times), or how genetics works. You make up terms like frequency/freq allele, as if having made up words makes it scientific.

And any goober can throw out somebody else's definitions, just like any goober can tear down a building. Go ahead and show that they are not. Anybody can tear down a building but can you build a replacement? So go ahead and undistort. All you've done so far is whine. Do something constructive.

You have been asked many times, how do YOU tell the difference between guided and unguided. What is the answer?