Thorton- Lying About Non-Random Selection, Again
Look evoTARDS, natural selection is a) a misnomer as nothing is being selected and b) just a badly named result- and according to Mayr, whatever is "good-enough" is the result. And according to reality that can be any number of variations that any population contains.
Even Dawkins says it is blind, although he also calls it non-random. It is also supposed to be mindless- blind and mindless, but allegedly non-random.
I wonder if there are any analogies- ID calls on engineering as an analogy, but there aren't any blind and mindless engineers and there aren't any blind and mindless watchmakers.
thorton claiming non-random selection
thorton's TARD FAIL response:
"non-random" in this case means not having a uniform probability distribution. That leads to differential reproductive success among the variations, one of the key aspects to the evolutionary process.
EXACTLY- natural selection is total bullshit. Thanks Thorton.