Richard Dawkin's big blunder

[max-greece]

What would "evolution without a target," even look like, to you?

Unguided evolution would be descent with change. There would be no cumulative selection. It would look like the random sentence generator in Dawkins' example.

---

I will have one more go at this to see how honest you are being in your inability to see how ridiculous you are being.



This pig-like creature lived in India about 55 million years ago. It was about the size of a domestic cat.

What did it become?

If you know that's fine - but are you really claiming its off-spring were potentially predictable? A potential target? Guided design?

What designer - if aiming for the target state of today's creatures (its offspring) would start from here?

The creature probably became a few different species. But if I had to guess which species is the answer you are looking for, I would say homo sapiens. I remember watching a documentary about human evolution and it featured a creature like this living near water. My second guess would be elephant.

If human beings lived in micro gravity for a long enough time, I predict we would effectively loose our legs. If we didn't loose our legs/feet they would become more arm/hand like.

If a designer is in the picture so to speak. He wouldn't start from your creature. He would have started at abiogenesis.

Well I would like to thank you for not cheating and looking it up.

Its actually one of 2 fancied originators of cetaceans (the other being a species called Mesonychid).

So one of the above, in all probability led to:



The Blue Whale!

Now tell me how that particular line of evolution would have ever been a predictable target state, actually from either end of the spectrum.

You can almost the whole story at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whale_evolution

That's the great thing about Whales. They preserve particularly well so we have an entire lineage to look at.