You aren’t making sense.
I asked what evidence you have for a specific hypothesis you put forth.
You’re splitting hairs, and being obtuse.
Either that, or you genuinely cannot understand how being able to solve problems could be a survival characteristic.
The original question being: “if our minds were not designed, how could we trust them?”.
I laid out a sequence of evolutionary stages, using simple language, that explains how a reliable capacity for reason could develop over time by benefiting those creatures that possessed it, and that humans as the eventual result of that evolutionary process would consequently possess that same reliable ability to reason, and thus be able to trust that mind.
The original question isn’t about concrete evidence; it’s about whether or not it could be possible to trust a mind that was the product of something other than design. I showed one way that we could trust a mind that wasn’t the product of design.