02 Apr '09 21:56>2 edits
Originally posted by Andrew Hamilton=================================
….even given 15 billion years of energy and matter interacting with each other in planless and goalless and purposeless "blind LUCK."
..… (my emphasis)
The natural selection part of evolution is not "blind LUCK" but rather just “blind” -how can it be “LUCK” when it is a non-random process? This clearly demonstrates you don’t understand evolution thus you don’t know what you are talking about.[/b]
The natural selection part of evolution is not "blind LUCK" but rather just “blind” -how can it be “LUCK” when it is a non-random process? This clearly demonstrates you don’t understand evolution thus you don’t know what you are talking about.
======================================
From the standpoint of survival, useful modifications are the result of probability working on behalf of the fitness of the organism.
In the argots of the street you certainly could call that "luck."
The "lucky" fit organisms survived. The unlucky ones did not. They died and discontinued.
All the living organisms in the world are the ones who came out so far on the lucky side of your process. That is from the standpoint that it is more desireable for living things to survive than to die out.