The amoeba is no more or less intelligent than the human. This is because the human has no objects that the amoeba can recognise and the amoeba has no objects that the human can recognise, and because intelligence is assessed from the manipulation of objects. We would have as little chance of surviving among amoebic objects as the amoeba would have of surviving among ours.
Intelligence and being adapted to your environment aren’t the same thing. All you described was that we’re adapted to our environment and the amoeba is adapted to its environment, and that neither one of us is adapted for the other party’s environment. That really has nothing to do with intelligence.
Most definitions of intelligence imply that a mind must be involved. To make the statement “an amoeba is not less intelligent than a person,” then, requires that you know the amoeba has a mind. Do you?
Amoebas don’t have “minds” insofar as people have ‘brains’.
If you can find the “brain” of an amoeba, then you should win a noble prize in biology. 
If intelligence were assessed from the manipulation of objects, you’d have a valid thesis.
Intelligence is more usually the ability to solve problems. Most humans have a more flexible conceptual scheme than most amoebae, as far as I know.
Being intelligent and adapted to your environment are not the same thing only if the objects of intelligence and the environment are the same.
Yes. But the “ability to solve problems” must be physically expressed, and that expression of ability is no less certain for the amoeba than it is for the human.
What?
A pretty good portion of your posts just make me say “what?”
I know. S’good innit. It’s a celebrat io n
no, it’s just random gibberish. what does it mean for the objects of intelligence to be the same as the environment? what does that even mean?
It doesn’t need to be in the manipulation of objects, though; behaviour is a far more usual expression. Humans rise above stimulus-response more readily, it seems.
The amoeba, like us, is for itself. Whether it’s inner life is a blaze of light or not is none of our business.
Intelligence is the manipulation of objects of the environment.
There is no relationship between intelligence and environment because they are not two things.
How do you come up with this stuff? Do you just pull words out of a hat? Is that how you make your posts on this site?
The accumulation of knowledge and technique in performing manipulations are elements of intellectual perceptiveness. How all of these are indications of intelligent functioning depends on the end for which they are the means. The concern for a perfection of means does not ensure an unquestionable end. Imo, accepting limitations is more of an intelligent approach.