Richard Dawkin's big blunder

[Esquilax]

You said he meant there was no conscious force guiding it....which is quite a bit different then there is no component of an evolutionary system which looks ahead.

If it's not conscious, what is there to look ahead? What predictive capabilities does nature have? You're not making any sense.

I should believe his assertion because it true? When fundies tell you to believe the bible because it is true do you still believe their assertion? This is poor argumentation on your part. In the video Dawkins makes an assertion, and goes on to state that his example fails to substantiate the assertion he makes. It isn't convincing.

Perhaps you can correct Dawkins' failure and produce an example of replicated cumulative selection that isn't "cheat".

Oh, I love this! You cut off the end of my quote, thus taking me out of context and ignoring the part where I provide evidence of there being no predictive potential in evolution, and then you take me to task for poor argumentation? Where do you get off?

This is the problem with you: you make this assertion that evolution can look ahead, while providing no mechanism through which that can happen. You're all bark and no bite; what process in natural selection "looks ahead" to you? What part of the natural world is making predictions and guiding evolution? For that matter, how does an unconscious environment guide anything?

Stop being so evasive, stop making up terms, and explain just what the hell you mean, because so far, it just looks like you have critically misunderstood evolution, Dawkins... pretty much everything.