Oh no, I understand what you are saying quite well. Algorithms like Google return "random results" per your definition of random. People are random because they are made of atoms and the electron spin is random... the results of pregnancy tests are random and poker is as random as roulette... I understand just fine... which is why I'm telling you that nobody with any credibility calls evolution a random process. Your definition doesn't distinguish between the butterfly and the 747 in the junkyard-- but you know that-- which is why you cling to your claim that there is no evidence that evolution is non-random.
I think you've worn out everybody else with your spin... you'll have to start recruiting some creationists if you want someone to pretend you are saying something useful or meaningful or if you want someone to think you understand natural selection.
You are free to insult me all you want, but you are the one using a definition that is not defined as you are using it in any peer reviewed journal. Nor are any of them saying "natural selection is random" nor are they saying evolution is random...nor are they saying that stochastic = random.
Maybe Whiteyonthemoon will help you see how vague you are or scrounge up some people who think you are super duper at modeling evolution. You can write up your thesis about how Dawkins et. al. are wrong and submit it for peer review and say "I told you so" to me when they publish it.
If you were my student, you'd get a D on conveyance of the process. But I'm sure Behe would give you a B+. I just want you to know I agree with you completely. Per your definition of random, evolution is random. And so is just about everything else.
articulett-
It is very clear from your posts that you are the on who is trying to obfuscate by using the word "random". None of the things that you listed above are actually random by the definition I am using. The results of a Google search are completely determined by whether the result page or page linked to the result page contains the search parameters. If a page does not contain any of the search parameters and none of the pages linked to that page contain any of the search parameters, that page will not appear in the results list. In order for a Google search to be random by the definition I am using, it would have to exclude page that contained all the the search parameters and include pages that that contained none of the search parameters, making that whole point of having a search engine rather moot given the amount of extraneous information it would provide.
Furthermore, as has been explained to you and cyborg many times, elementary algebra is not random by the definition I am using. It is true that you a can generate an algebraic equation by randomly picking coefficients, constants, and variables, but that doesn't make the functions and variable themselves random in the sense that the random variables of probability theory and statistics are random. The set of real-number solutions for any given equation or system of equations may be uncountably infinite but there are only certain ordered n-tuples that satisfy the equation or system of equations (e.g., the equation 3
x+2
y+
z=10 has an uncountably infinite set of real-number solutions, but (3,2,3) was always, is, and always will be a solution whereas (0,0,0) was never, isn't, and never will be a solution). Therefore, the solutions to an algebraic equation are completely determined by the coefficients and constants in the equation. On a more technical note, thought, the functions and variables of elementary algebra are not random in the mathematical sense from probability theory because they are defined by a Lebesgue measure on the extend reals where the random variables and probability distribution are random in the sense from probability theory because they are defined by a probability measure on the closed interval [0,1] (which is the only interval on which the probability measure is defined. In short, elementary algebra is not random in the sense that I have been using random and you are deliberately misrepresenting my position and obfuscating when you say that my definition makes elementary algebra random.
