Is ID falsifiable by any kind of experiment?

No, they claim on religious fantasy grounds that they haven't the intellect to understand the mechanisms involved. That information was not infused from anywhere. It was evolved by trial and error over many millions of years. Easy. First, even the gods must follow the rules. There is no evidence of their work when there should be if they interfered with natural evolution. We would see the disconnects in the lineages and between species.Second, this designer sucks. The designs look all the world like the ham-fisted glommed-on make-due approach of nature not the sleek intuitive designs of the universe's most intelligent being.We don't have to rule out anything. Apparently there is nothing there. Until someone shows evidence of this cosmic designer or his works there is nothing to justify the continued insistence on this fantasy.

Edited by AZPaul3, : word

What constitutes ID?What criteria would qualify as something falling under design?We have been waiting for the definitive tests of ID's claims for decades. It's about time.Yes, please answer those questions.

Over many generations of incremental change, that is how. Your personal incredulity is not going to change the fact that it did happen just as a product of evolution.And don't ask for proof. You knee-jerk deny all evidence regardless.What is your alternative? Lay out your process. Show us this intelligence behind intelligent design.

There is no such thing in genetics as COFA or CIFA. So you don't think incremental change in an organic structure can build a more complex organic structure? That dichotomy has still not been resolved. Yours is just another religious attempt to stuff the square peg in the round hole. CIFA, COFA are never used anywhere. You can't explain what they are.The only thing being guided is your fantasy. The Science of Evolution is just fine and dandy, thank you very much. You haven't questioned it one bit.

CIFA and COFA have no meaning. You cannot describe them. What intelligence? Where? How is this guidance achieved? What is the mechanism? Makes no sense. Why quickly conclude what in Biology about Evolution? There is no such thing as CIFA or COFA.You declare evolution is wrong yet you cannot show anywhere where evolution was wrong about anything. That is stupid.

You are confused on everything. Especially intelligence and evolution. Your ideas are all wrong and mean nothing.

Why? Intelligence is a continuum. It is not binary.Besides, the criteria we use is the evidence. In the entire history of the universe there has never been any evidence of this intelligence you speak of.CIFA/COFA is bullocks.

Oh BS. You have NO criteria. You cannot seem to express any and you certainly cannot use any to evidence anything. What CIFA?

How do you know it is not? Our evidence indicates it may well be. The museums, schools, etc, have hundreds of millions of such evidences. Hard physical evidence that you can actually pick up and study.You ever study a fossil specimen? Have you ever been to a museum or a school?How can you dismiss such a trove of evidence world wide so casually? What larger numbers of evidence do you show to compete with this? You have none but your fantasy numbers games. No data. No facts. No reality. CIFA is undefined so is simply wrong.

No. I'm not going to dig through known available evidence of genetics at work just so you can knee-jerk call it fake.This isn't our first foray into la-la land with a creationist. You want everyone to show you evidence of evolution while you provide none for your intelligent dingo-daddy or whatever.You dug this rabbit hole and it's up to you to deliver. What is cifa?Where is there ANY evidence of this sky dingo-daddy cosmic intellen thing?

Prove it. Show us this intelligence.

You made this all up from you fantasy. There isn't anything real here.This is the crux of your design fantasy. What 7 system?List them. Give support from biology that these systems are as you say. Then for each, what is the measure of intelligence vs natural?Don't give me any of your crap challenging evolution. Evolution is not the issue here. Either support your ID2.0 or fuck off.

You can't support your intelligent design. You have nothing.Your only gig is to try to demean evolution at which you miserably fail. ID2.0 is a farce so you have decided to just fuck off. Typical religious bozo.

Then you should know the subject, quite well. I asked some significant questions in Message 84. If you know the subject well it should not be much effort to answer those questions here in this thread.What 7 systems govern cellular organisms? Please list them and give us some reason why these systems are significant. Then explain, a few short paragraphs would do, this rating of the 7 systems that you use to determine intelligently guided versus natural.You say you know it. Prove it. Here in this forum. Cut and paste from your book but in short paragraphs if you need to.Start supporting your case by answering the inquiry.All we see from you is your hate for evolution. That is not a convincing argument. Not convincing support.No. I will not buy your book.

I find several DNA repair, several cell membrane repair, several mechanical injury repair, cell plasticity Acetylation regulation and about a dozen more repair mechanisms of known cellular machinery.You don't know what you're talking about, do you. Not gonna happen. You can't do it. You have nothing.You took all your rejected papers and self-published a book. You're here to push your religious hallucinations already rejected by the scientific community.What is it with you religious lunatics and the self-publication of your rejected fantasies? You're as much a fraud as Kleinman. Yeah, right. My great loss.