"Nop. This means that you have not developed a model to distinguish between random and seqwuential. It is intellectual bias that prevents this from being developing."
Sorry, this is a limitation of mathematics, it has nothing to do with bias or lack of effort.
See:
http://www.umcs.maine.edu/~chaitin/sciamer.html
"Although randomness can be precisely defined and can even be measured, a given number cannot be proved to be random. This enigma establishes a limit to what is possible in mathematics."
"It can readily be shown that a specific series of digits is not random; it is sufficient to find a program that will generate the series and that is substantially smaller than the series itself. The program need not be a minimal program for the series; it need only be a small one. To demonstrate that a particular series of digits is random, on the other hand, one must prove that no small program for calculating it exists. It is in the realm of mathematical proof that Gödel's incompleteness theorem is such a conspicuous landmark; my version of the theorem predicts that the required proof of randomness cannot be found. The consequences of this fact are just as interesting for what they reveal about Gödel's theorem as they are for what they indicate about the nature of random numbers."
Or, for that matter, about the nature of numbers, random or otherwise. If random can not be proven, perhaps it is because there is no such phenomenon.