Damn, people like you scare me. Evolution is so damn simple at its core, people cant just accept it. Ill take up your challenge, but like all others before me, I know damn well that youre just a troll and can't even understand a simple thing.
Lets do this slowly so you can understand it point by point. In order to have evolution, you need three things:
1: Replicators
2: Mutation of some sort (Copying errors, outside influence)
3: An environment with resources
That is all. You do not need design to create a replicator. It could be as simple as a chemical structure that bonds to a like copy of itself...thus creating a copy of itself. Then each copy, could make a copy of itself. There is no purpose to be read into, just a blind replicator chemical structure replicating itself, simply because thats what happens when you have molecules in that structure. Probably took billions of years for this eventual structure to be formed, simply by chance. That is the only part of evolution that is truly "blind". This could form by blind chance, through billions of years of almost infinite amounts of atoms/molecules interacting simply because theyre in proximity of each other. The experiments showing how simple amino acids can be formed using electricity certainly prove that.
Of course there are outside influences that change this structure, statistically over time...UV rays, copying errors etc. Its important to know that the vast, vast majority of changes are negative. But every now and then, some change may have been made that makes it just a bit of a better replicator, more stable etc...statistically, over long periods of time, that new "strain" will do better than the old strain, simply because its more efficient. Given enough time, and the right resources, it may form a configuration with some sort of barrier. Those replicators with protection certainly have the edge up. As the environment gets more limited, necessary resources are harder to come by. Then imagine a mutation which gives it some sort of locomotion, flagella etc, even if its random, aimless...it still has access to more resources than the drifting replicators and will soon begin to become more numerous, simply because its more likely to replicate. Over VAST periods of time, these changes really start to add, and you have basically, single celled organisms. The original replicator is essentially, the "DNA" of the cell. Imagine the cell having an ability to "sniff" out necessary resources...it is just chemically drawn to what it needs. Is that purpose? Now say that the "sniffer" only turns on when it is in need of something, this certainly gives it an advantage, and can all be done biochemically, but now you have an organism that seeks what it needs...is THAT purpose?
There is a very, very thick and fuzzy line between what is and isnt purpose.
Fast forward long enough, out of the innummerable trillion quadrillion gazillion amazingly ridiculously high number of generations of these simple organisms, symbiotic relations take place, where two cells can specialize in their own niche, and benefit from each other...given enough time, they will merge, and we will begin to have multi-cellular organisms. Then like a human society, each cell can "specialize in labor", and form different structures etc. All over VAST VAST expanses of time, do these random errors accumulate STATISTICALLY to evolve. Then throw some neurons into the mix, and perhaps that is where true "purpose" comes from. But purpose itself, is an evolutionary adaption...those organisms that stumbled upon the ability to direct themselves to what they needed, whether its blindly biochemical, or acted upon by a nervous system, are simply going to be able to exploit resources that were previously unexploited.
This doesnt necessarily spell the end of all other organisms, its just a new niche to exploit. Theres still tons of bacteria and microorganisms out there, still very "successful" doing what theyve always done.
So go billions of years ahead, up to the mammals. Every organism is exploiting the resources of their own niche...some are predators selected for their ability to physically catch prey (cheetahs running fast), some prey selected for their ability to physically escape prey (gazells running fast), or a turtle, with a thick shell of armor. Some mammals evolve the ability to outsmart both prey and predator, which is certainly an as yet fully exploited niche. Now that that path has been taken, you will soon have smart mammals, who not only have to outsmart their dumb competitors (turtles, just flip em over and crack em open!), but their already smart co-mammals. Thus an "intelligence arms race" will develop, with even more refined cognitive abilities. Hello man.
And to answer your previous question:
You would not have a cow, or anything even close to a complex mammal, if the organism was not able to get resources from its environment. Those organisms would not be able to replicate, and thus would not be here!
Cows that eat rocks don't survive to procreate. And if that doesnt satisfy you, Ill give you a simple, no need to even bring evolution into it argument. A cow comes from a cow, and cows eat grass. Baby cow will see mother cow eating grass. Baby cow which was previously starving, just realized that eating grass fufills its hunger. Although I can guarantee you baby cows are not that stupid, and grass just plain looks delicious to them.
Do YOU have an extensive knowledge of the biochemical makeup of the environment? From the sounds of it, definitely not. How did YOU know what to eat?
Facebook
Twitter