First evolution theory isn't about origins, it's about natural selection evolving new species from existing ones. to do this, natural selection picks from variations in the output or "phenotype' of EXISTING genes. In this case, the die is used to randomely select a phenotype of a wing, long, short, thick, wide etc. It is then tested to see how well it flies. This is the step that mimics design. The best available wing design is selected by random process, but they are "best" because they take advantage of the laws of physics which are not random, but very ordered. Nature itself produces something that looks like design, by eliminating the bad designs. This, by the way, is how Edison invented the light bulb. Trial and eror.
You are talking about events occuring within certain parameters. IAC, the first definition of design is not a plan but of action with an end in mind and taking place on a kind of “playing field” and in accordance with certain rules. Sort of like a football game.
I never claimed it was. I said the theory claims that all life evolved from the first single-celled life form.
natural selection picks from variations in the output or "phenotype' of EXISTING genes.
Unless you are trying to claim natural selection has intelligence, it is nothing more, in theory, than random mutations that turn out to be successful in helping the species survive. Limiting the choices of natural selection to wings and popsicle sticks is as joke as we both know that there are hundreds of millions of instructions in a single cell. Adding random mutation to that mix and you have an almost unlimited number of variables.
In this case, the die is used to randomely select a phenotype of a wing, long, short, thick, wide etc.
That assumes 'natural selection' has decided that a wing is the most valuable way for the species to survive, has 'selected out' all other options, and has limited the possible designs for the wing. Sorry, but unless you are claiming some intelligence in 'natural selection' that doesn't wash.