Isn't a hawk eating dark rabbits on the snow a pattern? Why not? Not all the dark one are food, and not all the white ones escape, but there is still a pattern there. It's rather like tossing loaded dice. You don't always win, but you win more than you lose.
Natural Selection is little more than an observation in the past tense - it is not a force that has aim, reason, or pattern therefore it is random.
Remember the peppered moths? That was testing natural selection in action; there was nothing post-hoc involved.
I am guessing some Darwinists find comfort in thinking Natural Selection is not random?
I don't think we're communicating. If the hawk picked light and dark rabbits with equal probability, that's lacking a pattern; but if it feeds on those it can see easier, that's a pattern. Are you using the words the same way I am?
The hawk knows nothing about Natural Selection - it eats what it can. The only pattern observed is Hawks eat - I hope you don't think the fact that Hawks eat proves natural selection is not random
Look - if Natural Selection is not random than something most be controlling/setting the pattern - name the something or tap-dance further.