The Problem with Christians

[TheRocketSurgeon]

Which is why randomness isn't the only factor. You've had this explained to you nearly 10^18 times. I think you've demonstrated the worth of your science degree by now. You really should quit before you embarrass yourself further; hell, I think we're all embarrassed for you at this point.

From the Atheist in Chief Prof Richard Dawkins,

"All appearances to the contrary, the only watchmaker in nature is the blind force of physics, albeit deplored in a special way. A true watchmaker has foresight: he designs his cogs and springs, and plans their interconnections, with a future purpose in his mind's eye. Natural selection, the blind unconscious, automatic process which Darwin discovered, and which we now know is the explanation for the existence and apparently purposeful form of all life, has no purpose in mind. It has no mind and no mind's eye. It does not plan for the future. It has no vision, no foresight, no sight at all." http://www.update.uu.se/~fbendz/nogod/watchmak.htm

According to him, the process of natural selection is completely random. The survival of any given organism may be benefited by certain mutations to the DNA but this is in no way responsible for improving the odds that the next mutation will be beneficial. You still have to have an absurd number of successful mutations to get anywhere.

You're quite right that a mutation which is successful doesn't mean that the "next" one (I presume you mean the ones that occur in its offspring) will also be beneficial.

The problem is, that's irrelevant because you're thinking in linear terms, not in terms of a gene pool. If a beneficial mutation helps an individual reproduce better than the others in that gene pool, then that gene will become more prevalent in following generations.

How many cousins do you have? I ask because in only two generations, in which my grandmother had six children, each of whom had a minimum of three children, I have acquired over 20 cousins, all of whom would carry the mutation that I acquired (ETA: from grandma). That's in TWO generations! Imagine a genetic mutation which occurs in my great-great-great-grandmother, and how many people now carry it. If only a few of those descendants then go on to develop harmful follow-on mutations, then they will be selected out of the gene pool as they produce fewer offspring.

That's why the process is blind, with no goal in mind except to reproduce. 

Please do us the favor of ceasing to manufacture straw-men of evolutionary biology, and go learn some more instead of pretending you know. It's clear to most of us that you only skim materials in order to push confirmation bias to its limit.