Yes, I understand that is the going theory. I don't think you've really heard my arguments.

This is from the original text, as I don't think you've read it.

For example, genetic memory possibly reconciles the abject absurdity of the simple fluke, that probably can’t wrap its few neurons around where the sun goes; radically possessing an intimate knowledge of an ants anatomy with the means and knowledge to manipulate its host insect by hijacking its brain and sending it on a suicidal mission into the gut of a mammal thereby acquiring the fluke’s prefered environment. As the tree of life is seemingly aware of itself with respect to large swathes of related evolutionary paths via passed down information writ in DNA.

As far as successful reproduction or death being the only factor here, read this follow comment I posted elsewhere.

If the state of things really were purely random variation, wouldn't we see many more missteps in mutations that isn't due to inbreeding or disease which is mainly seen in humans? I know that miscarriages or a common occurrence, however, if it truly was purely random mutation wouldn't we see entire species fall into inferiority and extinction other than mass extinction events and the meddling of humans? Would you say that this lack is due to competitive pressures? I agree that plays a crucial role. Yet what of these seemingly nonsensical courting rituals? The males of some animals vie for dominance and the competitiveness there seems somewhat appropriate for expressing vitality, but what of these fish creating sufficiently complex designs on the seabed floor to impress gallery patrons of the opposite sex? Or what of these spiders that get eaten by the females of their own species if they don't like the male's dance enough, and mate with them if they do? How does this dance dance revolution, and art show have anything to do with fitness? I recognize that these are shows of complexity and so a show of intelligence, which is beneficial, however, why wouldn't the expressions be closer to the spirit of evolution itself? Survival fitness and excellence of form in diet acquisition? Instead of these fastidious birds concerned with an adequate amount of pleasing blue in their mating bower? Truly, if these are the criteria, wouldn't there be some flawed genes, even if they were short-lived, passed down so that there were evident malformations somewhere in nature? Do miscarriages account for this entire absence? Notwithstanding, I don't know how some of these species even get off the ground, as with my example of the Erodium seed that corkscrews itself into the soil. For surely, how could there be a slow progression of trial and error adaptations in the development of this seed while failure in burrowing simply means failure to pass on genes? Or how could it have evolved so quickly and manifested the perfect form to directly and aptly burrow? That would be taking a hard intentional stance painting it with the knowledge of efficacy available in slowly releasing tension in its roots from a coiled state. Or maybe it randomly mutated for such a state, all the while the expression was dormant or rarely active, while the seed propagated by its usual method and the new tinkering eventually and randomly expressed itself one more time in all of its perfection. Do you see the persistence and deliberate knowledge-bound direction necessary here with no possible reaffirming success available to actualize a feat such as this until its completion? all the while parting from a previous method of propagation that was indubitably adequate, nevertheless in a seemingly predictive capacity the Erodium is supposed in this case to continue mutation seemingly with a knowledge of the possibilities present here, and impeccably executed without reward. It is hard for me not to paint the little minimally witnessing feedback loop with the knowledge required... see? I believe ancestral knowledge is accrued over generations, creating an understanding of exceptional ecological form and function from the virus right on up to the elephant. The bacteriophage is a virus that pervades all animals, accepted into the body because it eats bacteria and reproduces by them. To the point where transplants are more readily accepted while heavily laden in bacteriophages, as the body recognizes the bacteriophage as a foreign body yet beneficial. Life is acutely aware and concerned with what is good for it evident in our white blood cells consistently making decisions of benefit or harm. Why would you ever think that life wouldn't take the same stance with the editing of its own adaptation? Just look what I found while reading some structural biology, "Indeed, cells have evolved truly elegant mechanisms to determine which strand contains the original undamaged information in strands of DNA." It is my belief that all DNA is maintained, even what is supposed as junk as it is largely not junk at all, but crucial knowledge.

Anyway... I'll add that it is known gene expression may change right from your experience. A traumatic event may express a predisposition to violence. Or methylation may occur just due to stress, starvation or smoking. Let me ask, what kind of specific correlated response is this? How may our unconscious chemicals give such a direct response that leads to survival? As if it is understood what the very resultant expression on a macro scale actually is. I do not say evolution is intelligent in the sense that it is directed as if by higher cognitive functions such as our forebrain's capacity, but that "judgements" of what is ecological fitness or not, coupled with accumulating knowledge of the environment is and its possible usefulness and of other organisms in it, further of what form is adequately thriving in that environment is a directed process toward fitness. I am not saying that the mixture of information through sex and the resultant expression of what is "decidedly" is of most efficacy is not of great importance not operatively consequential, but I cannot appeal everything witnessed here to the randomness of merely a successfully sexually mature mate that survived long enough to pass on genes. The perfect form and function we see in nature compellingly lead me to this notion as even considering miscarriages the exceptional expression observed is absent of unfit creatures anywhere on earth or in history even if there is somewhat of an oddball here and there, it is still perfect for its niche. Id like to point to a study where mice learned to respond in fear to a certain sound and those mice's children, with no training, gave the same response as if they had the knowledge...

We are part of the very same tree of life right along with all living beings on this planet and evolved along with everything else right here on earth. You do not have to appeal to some radical phenomena that sets us apart for our extraordinary experience and faculties. Having said this I have Pantheistic views.

Well thats your opinion but my life expereinces tell me something else.We have free minds, unlike most of the rest of life on this planet,that is what seperates us. Otherwise we would not be having this conversation. : )

I don't think you understand my argument here... I am not claiming that we are not apart from the animal kingdom. Our faculties are of an exceptionally advanced complexity, our forebrain is especially key, allowing our anticipation of the future and higher cognitive functions. We are the only species that may even ask a question... What is your position here? Because I'll tell you, my experience is such that I may not deny the existence of a God as well. However, evolution is science fact. It is evident. Furthermore, I would like to point out the language of dolphins. The emotional attachments of elephants. The problem solving of octopi. The tool use of apes and on and on. Yes, we have superior cognition, but do not discount the animal kingdom as strictly dumb.

Well there are levels of dumb.Can you explain the concept god to a dolphin?

Thank you for your response. I wonder if anthropomorphism plays a role in any capacity as I am keen on recognizing things from an intentional stance, I will admit. However, do not mistake that I am supposing anything near the faculties we possess and our ability to carry ourselves with intention is what we witness in nature. I am simply imbuing these systems with more awareness of their environment and other organisms, while the survival mechanism which may be witnessed right down to bacteria takes the reigns. I have more argumentation, it seems to be cut off in the original post...

@tsjames, I always make the assumption that people are clever enough to pick up on when I'm being snarky, sardonic, sarcastic, humorous, or just plain dumb. I am always amazed at how few actually do. You, sir, are more clever than most.

Likely, every single evolutionary biologist there is, sir.

Evolution seems very natural and logical to me. I wouldn't call this "dumb".