Is ID falsifiable by any kind of experiment?

All erroneous scientific explanations like the old ID and Evolutions are falsifiable.The new ID had falsified them both.Amazon.com

What are you talking about?

Evolution's explanation is really fantasy.You need to remember that Evolution had concluded that the change of freq alleles, COFA or change in freq allele, CIFA, is not guided intelligently or not controlled or not guided, or not manipulated.Claiming that"Rather, the evolutionary model is that all those features evolved together."is one of the most unscientific claims, for it has no evidence whatsoever. How could a non-guided, non-manipulated COFA. CIFA could arrive and form, say, the eye or ears or nose?Evolution and its supporters must first show that a non-manipulated COFA or CIFA is the SOP (standard operating procedure) for the change in biological world.Now, the old ID was correct to say that if there is no novel allele that will be formed by using COFA or CIFA, then, Evolution is not science. Where will Evolution get a new novel allele through COFA, CIFA?

It is very simple. What science is trying to accomplish in Biology? Origin of species or just change of freq alleles (COFA) or change in freq alleles CIFA?I understood "incremental change" but it is still a "change", and it does not make anything so particular that requires too much attention.The new ID had solved the definition of intelligence and non-intelligence, and when used in Biology, CIFA and COFA are found to be guided, thus, the origin of life and the origin of species are guided. And the name of that theory is Biological Interrelation.So, how about Evolution?

Evolution is really a fantasy theory. And supporters of Evolution do not really know how to make consistent theory which is based in science and in reality. --- Fitness could guide? Really? There is no test for this. That is an unscientific claim. --- Beneficial? There is no test that "fitness" could distinguish beneficial X to non beneficial X, and the dividing line between the two Xs. It is a fairy tale. Provide test for these criteria. --- Are you talking about Twitter Files that were deleted like the files for Hunter Biden? There is no test that "fitness" could delete files, oh sorry, I mean, delete bad genes, since how do you know that fitness recognizes bad and good genes? Please, provide on how you arrive in this criteria. --- Oh, a while ago you claimed "fitness" did it, and now you newly claimed that "natural selection" did it. Which one?
The word "fix" and "selection" imply control and manipulation or intention, but change in frequency alleles, CIFA and change in frequency alleles, COFA, are not controlled, as per Evolution's basis. So, which one are you talking about?You must provide first universal criteria and dividing line between fix and unfixed X, or selected and unselected X, etc., with numerical value or limit so that science could progress and could measure your claim. Also, Evolution and its supporters must provide a criteria between good and bad genes, or beneficial and non-beneficial, with dividing numerical limits so that science could advance. You cannot simply claim and conclude something without any criteria with test. That is the definition of stupidity in science.Once again, provide criteria first and let us see if your criteria are part of reality in Biology. --- Where did mutation get the new alleles if allele is defined as "An allele is one of two or more versions of DNA sequence (a single base or a segment of bases) at a given genomic location". Remember that to avoid a 100% cloned individual, change is imminent. so, do not simply claim, show it where mutation get the new allele.
​ --- That is a claim that has no support. You are pre-suppositioning and pre-concluding that humans did come from chimps. Humans and chimps are interrelated living organisms but humans did not evolve from chimps. There are no evidences that humans did come from apes. There are no transitional fossils and no missing links that fit to the description of COFA and CIFA. --- As I said before that where did mutation get the new alleles that supposed to be separate humans from chimps? Do not claim in science if you have no evidences. That is Science 101. Show evidences first.

You have a reading comprehension.

1. I said that science must decide what science wants to explain in Biology, either origin of species or change in species, in that case, change in frequency alleles (CIFA) or change of frequency alleles COFA.2. There are no test nor evidences that "incremental change in an organic structure can build a more complex organic structure", without guided by intelligence, or intention,. That is why Evolution is wrong in all of its claims.3. To Evolution, the topic of intelligence and non-intelligence are not resolved, so, why quickly conclude in Biology about Evolution? That is the very definition of stupidity: quickly conclude without knowing anything.4. Evolution is simply CIFA or COFA, whatever, Evolution is wrong anyway.

I am not confused on anything.

No, it was Evolution and its supporters.Before any sane scientist could claim that a change is not-intentional or no intelligence involved in change in/of freq alleles, CIFA/COFA, that sane scientist must have criteria and numerical dividing lines or numerical limits between the two opposing extremes. Evolution, Darwin and supporters of Evolution have no criteria for the two, thus, Evolution is wrong. Thus, we can easily conclude that Evolution is an stupid theory, since stupid theory will always conclude without any criteria.

I am not confused. I am perfectly fine since I have the best criteria between intentional CIFA/COFA to non-intentional CIFA/COFA in biological world.Thus, it was you who are very confused.

That is why Evolution is BS since you are claiming that intelligence is continuum, and yet you cannot even define intelligence. That is really BS in science!
​ There is no evidence for Evolution that you can use as criteria. And what criteria for what? None evidence. Zero. Thus, Evolution is BS.​ Evolution is simply change in frequency alleles (CIFA) or change of frequency alleles (COFA), whatever, Evolution is wrong anyway.

Once again, there are no evidences for Evolution. Your fantasies and fairy tale mind are making you deluded.Give me one evidence for Evolution that support change in freq alleles, CIFA, that could not be found in generation 1?

What we are seeing in biological word are products of intelligence, and not Evolution.

That is why Evolution is a stupid theory since Evolution did not include all topics that will support and break Evolution to pieces. Meaning, there are many topics in Biology like the topic of intelligence or instinct or intentional etc that will surely affect Evolution and its explanation. That is why Evolution is stupid and inconsistent with reality.

It is so easy to show how stupid Evolution is.On the origin topic with Intelligent Design...
​
To tell you the truth, I was not there when the first life or first living biological cell was created or intelligently designed (intellen), so I cannot claim anything. But, since science is using human and its experience (empirical) in dealing with many things to understand reality, then, I will be using that to answer the origin of life and DNA or cell.
​
The new Intelligent Design had discovered the differences between intelligently designed X (intellen X) to non-intelligently designed X (naturen X), which means that only the new ID has the correct powerful and universal explanation in science that are reliable and precise. Supposed to be, Darwin and the former many famous scientists before me, in science or in Biology, should be discovering that universal pattern between the two. But sad to say, because of the stupidity of Darwin and his arrogant supporters, science did not have that universal pattern from them. Shame on them for insulting Creationism (as Creatards) that Creationism has no universal criteria, and kicked Creationism out in schools and in society, in where, they too, Evolution and its supporters, had no criteria to offer. Dare to challenge me in here?
​
So, by basing the universal pattern, or I called it the UBL, universal boundary line, any intellen X must have at least 1.5 supports as minimum to be called/labeled as intelligently designed X, intellen X. The maximum support is 3, to be labeled as intelligently designed X (intellen X). If there is no support, then, it is non-intelligently designed X or naturen X. To those who are opposing these criteria, I challenge anyone to make an experiment between intelligence and non-intelligence, and compare with my discovery, OR SHUT UP! Or support me.
​
Since before I was born, DNA, cell, and life are already existing, then, to test if both life and DNA or cell are intellen or naturen, then, we need to find supports. Biological science had been reporting that cell, to function well, has seven (7) supports mechanisms or systems, or sometimes I called them, defense or repair mechanisms. Since seven (7) is greater than 3 as maximum limit of intelligence, then, the new ID categorized cell as important intellen. If God-Creator, as the Intelligent Agent, as the best candidate for that Intelligent Agent (IA) did it, then, this Agent had created cell so important! Life is so important!
​
Now, the new ID has also devised and invented new model, the Biological Interrelation, BiTs, to fight side by side, model vs model, head to head, science vs science with Biological Evolution. And BiTs discusses about the origin and change as we could witness and observe in reality, in biological world. And BiTs too uses the powerful science from the new ID, since I am both the same author of the two, thus, BiTs is forced to conclude, from the result of categorization of the biological cell as intellen cell, and the conclusion is that biological cell and its origin is intelligently created or designed, thus, Creationism, with respect to the origin of both life and cell, is the only correct explanation in Biology. Which further means that everything that we are seeing in biological world are guided intelligently - for life.
​
Well, some of you may say, "That is wrong and stupidity", but I had the basis of my explanation, as you read from above, thus, you either falsify my basis by conducting another new experiment showing that my understanding and discovery of intelligence is wrong, and let us compare. Or defeat me in the topic of intelligence, and you defeat me all. PUT UP, or SHUT UP!
​
Thus, either I am a stupid/moron or a genius.

Thank you for your reply.I will reiterate that I am not saying that there are no changes in biological world, since when parents (as gen 1) produce 4 individual offsprings (gen 2), anybody could see that they are not 100% perfectly cloned. There are differences, but they do not evolve, they just interrelate.Again, when you use the word selection, if you are honest, you will surely think two possible scenarios: selected and not selected, with their numerical limits. Unless, you are intellectually insane, you will never use the word "selection" in English language, or any languages, unless, you would like to define "selection" with different definition, as could be seen in reality, with experiment.That is very basic. Since words always convey meaning, especially when you use that in science. Thus, what is your criteria and limits between selected to non-selected, and their numerical limit or value? Where did you get those criteria? And why we must follow that criteria and what are the test and evidences that your criteria is correct?Again, you are comparing two things or two Xs in biology, as you claimed about mutation. But, I knew that you are not probably stupid, but in science when we compare two things, we put numerical value as limits so that we can test and falsify. What is the point of using science if we cannot show them numerically?For example, the GRAVITY differences between Earth and moon, we compare them, but we always measure that with numbers. Thus, mutation or changes or selection must have numbers and limits so that science could progress. Now, do you have that?