Richard Dawkin's big blunder

[Bittersmart]

Now you're not making any sense. A river forms banks based upon gravitational pull and electromagnetism causing the atoms of the river and the banks to be unable to share space. Organisms form based upon random mutations which are then selected due to their benefit towards survival. It's natural processes guiding both.

The point is in replicating a river you don't have to do anything other than let the laws of physics operate on matter. Dump a large amount of water on the ground and something like a river will form.

Replicating Darwinian evolution is not so easy. You have to contrive a selection mechanism. You have to make a judgment about what is going to be a benefit towards survival and what isn't. You cannot replicate Darwinian evolution without making these conscious decisions....at least I haven't seen it. Dawkins' admittedly couldn't do it.

I agree with you that both processes are guided and are natural. Where I disagree is in the assertion that both processes are blind.

Evolution is just the same. It operates just the same way a river would form, it's just more complex with many more variables. They are both products of the natural world operating under natural laws, nothing more. The reason we see convergent evolution is because some basic features provide more adaptability to creatures, that's all. They are blind processes without any goal in mind or any guidance needed. Honestly, it would be strange not to see any similarities between any animals on Earth. Furthermore, even if you could shape an environment to try and select a trait in an animal, there is no guarantee it would actually happen. You might just end up killing the species instead. Or it might evolve a much different adaptation, as long as it survives.