Richard Dawkin's big blunder

[Esquilax]

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.

That is, literally, what I said.

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?

He did specifically say that his example was "a bit of a cheat." He acknowledges the contradiction. You should believe his assertion because it's true, which is evidence in a wide variety of evolutionary results.

There are so many organisms featuring traits that illustrate just perfectly how evolution does not, in any way, have a sense of foresight or coherence of design. Giant squid brains, for example, are donut shaped, and their esophagus travels right through the center ring, and is capable of touching the sides. Does that sound like something that's looking ahead to you?