[PatrickHenry]

... both observable and falsifiable:
Algorithm (Euclidian type) at inception is proof of intelligent design.

I recall this being discussed a few months a go. Some of our more math-literate posters really tore into it. I'm not qualified to re-create what they said, and I didn't fully follow the discussion. My vague recollection is that even an undirected process can be described with an algorithm, so the existence of such wouldn't be persuasive. But I may have that wrong, so I'll leave it to the others to deal with.

Falsifications: (a) evidence that there is no algorithm at inception, (b) evidence that there was no inception, (c) evidence that decision-making, awareness and purpose are not properties of intelligence.

As for these falsifications, I don't think (a) or (b) really test anything, and (c) doesn't do much for me. This whole area needs work. And I'm pretty much out of the ID game, for reasons stated earlier in the thread.

Which gives me more time to extend [hugs]!

[Doctor Stochastic]

Algorithm (Euclidian type) at inception is proof of intelligent design.

It indicates that Euclid was intelligent. (Or whoever invented the algorithm.) Not all fields have an Euclidean algorithm.

[Alamo-Girl]

Thank you so much for your reply!

I recall this being discussed a few months a go. Some of our more math-literate posters really tore into it. I'm not qualified to re-create what they said, and I didn't fully follow the discussion.

Not at all. What was being challenged was the definition of the word "algorithm" - hence I'm being specific right up front this time in stipulating the type of algorithm, i.e. Euclidean.

I wish you would stay engaged in the discussion, PatrickHenry! Your insights are always much appreciated. Hugs!