Richard Dawkin's big blunder

[Chas]

You could save us all time and just tell us what you think it means.

By "blind" I think Dawkins means evolution isn't destined to produce a particular outcome....that there is no component of an evolutionary system which looks ahead. He demonstrates this by replicating evolution which has looked ahead because he can't replicate cumulative selection otherwise. He makes an assertion which is completely contradicted by his example. Why should I or anyone believe his assertion?

Maybe you can watch the video again and tell us what you think he means.

You still don't understand Dawkins's examples. He is most definitely not "replicating evolution". That is a basic problem with your argument.
The examples are to demonstrate aspects of the mechanisms of evolution. One (weasel) shows the power of cumulative change vs. random, all at once change; the other (biomorphs) shows how simple rules can result in complex forms.

Your argument is utterly flawed by your misunderstanding.