Originally Posted by Makhnov

When you say "random" it is almost as if you mean to say anything and everything is possible with evolution. To answer this you will need to be more specific about what you mean by the word "random", when you say evolution is random. There may be upper bounds on it, that even Dawkins is unaware of. It seems to be that a single upper bound on evolution No matter how small, insignificant it may seem to us -- that will cause the process to no longer be random (in any sense of the word random).

An example of what an "upper bound" means would be, for example, something to do with the range of temperatures in which water is liquid, for instance. This could later come to have unforseen effects on the distances planets can be from stars and then put limits on the energy available to ecosystems, and so on. Then we get small bounds on "what is possible". In turn, arguments for "randomness" look weaker.