Nesslig 20

<infobox>

 <title source="title1">
   <default>Nesslig 20</default>
 </title>
 <image source="image1">

</image> <group> <header>Information</header> <label>Gender</label> <label>Scientific Name</label> <label>Positions</label> <label>Debating Against</label> <label>Skills</label> <label>Links</label> </group> </infobox>

Basic Description

Although MrIntelligentDesign (Edgar) had a little time interacting with Nesslig in Steve's GDC Channel in G+, especially when MrID (me) was invited by Steve in his YouTube's channel, but I think that Nesslig is very knowledgeable in the topic of evolution and Theory of Evolution (ToE).

But we had a little bit discussion (or debate, shall we say) in GDC Wiki. - from MrIntelligentDesign

Nesslig vs MrID in "Evolution or ToE"

When MrID had shared the science of the new Intelligent Design <id> about "evolution" in GDC Lexicon (now could be read in MrID's profile, Nesslig had initially corrected (Correction 1) MrID's initial comments. Knowing that a fair science must have always a fair explanation, MrID had clarified it (Clarification 1). But MrID was surprised that Nesslig had corrected (Correction 2) them again. But since the topic is naturalistic science in where the topic is between models (and I am a discoverer in science), that is, evolution (ToE) vs interrelation (Biological Interrelation, BiTs), MrID had now used the explanatory power of the new Intelligent Design <id> to Nesslig's science when MrID had written the Clarification 2. But it turned out that Nesslig could never answer many direct questions with direct answers.

One of many strength of the new Intelligent Design <id> and the Biological Interrelation (BiTs) is in the topic of intelligence. The topic of intelligence had shown in science almost all reality - it is superb and it is so powerful. The new <id> holds this discovery..nailed it..and explained it in details. This is where Nesslig had lost its science and lost its posture in the said discussion.

I understand Nesslig since he had no clue on the topic of intelligence, thus, he cannot answer all my direct questions. I've been doing an online debate for almost 30 years in science, that is why I knew how to debate and discuss and knew how to win in any debate.

I am hoping that Nesslig should continue our discussion and show me where I am wrong since if I'm wrong, Nesslig could help me (as promised) delete all my science books, and all my science videos and delete all my nonsense in science! He could even show to the world the real explanation of "intelligence", better than the new Intelligent Design <id>! Or delete his science and support the new Intelligent Design <id>.

Below are the unanswered topics that we had discussed:

Indirect Answer (IA) SUMMARY

IA1. The topic is life and its course of change.

IA2. The topic is the wrong usage of Natural Selection in scientific field.

IA3. The topic is which is the scientific definition of intelligence

IA4. The topic is the categorization of all Xs and processes

IA5. The topic is that ToE has no categorization method in science

IA6. The topic is which model that could explain a broad topic in reality

IA7. The topic is which model has a complete set of explanation from the origin of life to categorization of all Xs and all processes

IA8. The topic is which is the specific meaning of intelligence

IA9. The topic is changing at will any variable or constant in both science and math

IA10. The topic is the actual application of Natural Selection when explaining the flow of the river.

IA11. The topic is the actual usage of random and non-random in reality

IA12. The topic is life in biology for non-random and not gravity

IA13. The topic is actual model for Biology to explain the whole reality in biological world. - from MrIntelligentDesign