Intelligent design type evolution vs naturalism type evolution.

[Mystic]

It doesn't have to, it merely needs to survive. However, there are plenty of ways that a gene might piggyback on the success of things entirely unrelated. Consider a patch of grass and weeds growing in a small right angled box (like a coldframe). Those organisms that get more sunlight (due to shade from the box structure) or moisture (due to overhead cover from the box structure) will have their genetics more widely represented generations in the future than their unfortunately shaded and sheltered brothers and sisters.

I see what your saying. But that makes sense for that mutation to simply become popular, but not a series of mutations that follow up that are making it from point A (non-turning) to point B (Turning). One mutation fine, two or three, fine, but a whole small series of them, leading towards a complex system, that takes direction and needs that to be favoured in some way or another.

Also it seems you need several parts from non-turning to turning to work in conjunction, but that seems problematic if it's only small changes, so hope you see where I'm stuck at.

---

Even if all the mutations leading up to it were benign, but ultimately not conferring any specific advantage.

This is where we differ. I just don't see how a bunch of parts could slowly be forming towards a turning thing, if there was no advantage, and then all of sudden come together as a system. I rather have it appear to me, that it's not really possible.

Simply stating, this when from A To B then To C, without explaining, why B was possibility advantage, or that inbetween A and B and B and C, all stages were possibly advantageous, seems problematic.

Ofcourse step "C" is obviously advantageous. But it's trivial to talk about that advantage instead of how it was lead to that by advantage.