Richard Dawkin's big blunder

[Esquilax]

Convergent Evolution is strong evidence that natural evolution does home in on specific targets. Convergent evolution is the tendency of independently evolved organisms to sometimes take on the same biological traits and forms. A good example of convergent evolution is the grey wolf and the Tasmanian wolf. These two animals evolved independently yet if you were given a set of skulls to identify, chances are you could not tell which one is close relative of the poodle and which one is a close relative of the kangaroo.

On the one hand, congrats on actually knowing that convergent evolution exists, there are a lot of theists who don't, and don't care that they don't.

On the other, I sure do wish you had a better understanding of it. Convergent evolution doesn't demonstrate that specific evolutionary targets are being aimed for, you've got that ass backwards. What it shows is that certain bodily forms are versatile and useful in multiple situations. This isn't evidence that the wolf "form" is being aimed at, but that it's a useful body type to have.

Aside from being similar, there's no connection between the two. They just evolved toward a more "correct" shape for their settings, that happened to be similar.

If evolution isn't blind then there are theistic implications.

Now that you understand it better, do you still think this?