Ah...so my comment about the book on the sidewalk is "character assassination," but this little condescending bon mot is true intellectual engagement. Suuuurrrre.
Well, the idea that the gene mutation may be random is possible ( or proteins playing Frankenstein), however the advantage or disadvantage that the mutation provides the organism in adapting to the environment is now no longer chance, but rather a direct probability factor in the organism surviving to reproduce.
At some point a bat was presumably a small, flightless rodent with legs and paws that in no way resembled a wing. To get from something like a mouse to leathery wings, its forelimbs would have had to go through several stages of mutation somewhere between a leg and a wing, i.e., far less useful than a leg for ground travel and useless for flight.
Where is the increased probability that this creature will reproduce and pass on the first mutation, much less that its descendants will down the line?
What are the chances that these mutations will continue, and do so in a direction that's beneficial to the creature instead of just stopping at some point or going off in a direction that bears no fruit? Doesn't that quickly become an infinitesimal probability? And since this is just one sort of animal, what happens when that same probability problem is applied to every single one of the billions of species that exist today or existed in the recent past?
Pretty cool idea based on observable phenomena and reproducible tests huh?
What reproducible test has shown a string of mutations can lead to a new body plan? Can you even show me a reproducible lab example of a beneficial mutation?
Drug resistance in bacteria. It’s good for the bacteria, not for the organism infected.