And the experiment itself is proof that a guiding intelligence is required to get this to work.
Again, the same fallacy. If you can never prove something then you cannot surmise anything from that. If can not prove non-intelligence, you cannot prove intelligence. You can't prove anything.
You defeat your own arguments before I even have to deal with the scientific errors in your statements.
And when you get into "proof" you get into philosophy, not science.
Fine, instead of ‘proof’ I will call it ‘evidence’. I could also call it ‘fact’. Because it is a fact.