Entropy is Still an Ignorant Ass

 -

Earth to Entropy- Natural Selection is a process of elimination. It does NOT select, dumbass.

So far you’ve shown what I already told you: that there’s a need for variation in order to have something to select, but you failed with the “mandates”, because, again, natural selection is not about the source of such variation, it’s what happens because there’s variation.

Wrong. There isn't any selection going on, dipshit. So there isn't anything to select, moron. Artificial selection involves actual selection.

Natural selection includes the variation. That much is obvious from the several references that I have provided. Mayr calls the variation the first step in natural selection.

Natural selection is the RESULT of THREE processes. That means those THREE processes are part of NS. NS cannot occur unless we have those three processes present. And yes, you can have mutations absent of NS. But we are discussing NS.

Next, entropy chokes as it is too fucking stupid to understand that I only need ONE definition of the word "chance" to satisfy what I have posted. Only ignorant assholes think that I need more than one or all definitions of the word to satisfy my claim.

It isn’t the one and only definition Joe G. Not being planned is but one of the parts of the one definition you decided to quote.

Don't care. All I need is ONE. So the asshole spews:

So, if there’s an observable cause, it’s no longer chance, as in not being merely random or unexpected or unpredictable.

Thank you for proving that you are an ignorant ass. That pretty much means everything with an observed cause didn't happen by chance. Accidents in which people ran a red light are no longer accidents. They are planned according to the moron entropy.

The with respect to telic and chance being antonyms the ignorant ass says:

I see words there that have nothing to do with telic Joe G.

Design, intended, purpose are all there and all represent telic processes, you ignorant ass.

On Mayr agreeing with me the moron sez:

If he did, he wouldn’t have written “almost” and “except.”

CONTEXT matters, dumbass. And his context was the mutations are constrained. Meaning they are more likely to occur in some sequences and not others. Read the book. That just makes them non-random in some respect. They are still unpredictable and spontaneous.

Now the piece-of-shit is actually trying to ay something about my clarifying my post due to ignorant evoTARDs.

Too bad YOU don't get to tell me what I did nor why I did it, entropy.

According to Darwin the variation is a chance event. Period. Read the book as your ignorance is not an argument. According to mainstream evolution, the mutations are accidents, errors and mistakes- all chance events. Variation has ALWAYS been part of the concept, dumbass. Read the book as your ignorance is meaningless.

Natural selection does not include mutations that happen by design. If the mutations happen by design then the result is not natural selection. That's because mutations by design ruins the designer mimic requirement of NS. The whole point of NS was design WITHOUT a designer. So if you have a designer forcing specific mutations then you do NOT have natural selection. It is that simple. Natural selection does care about the source of variation, moron. Design via telic processes is not a designer mimic.