I generally post because I'm bored and want to express an opinion.
And posting on this site makes me feel smrt.
I'm one of you smart people, right guys? Guys??
Actually I like the way that you frame arguments. You are smart enough...evolution has been kind to you.
Or could it beeee? *looks up towards sky, scratching his head...*
thinking he has an axe to grind, finds it is a toy rubber axe that bounces back when he tries to use it in a real axe fight, and runs away.
Or perhaps he is actually reading what everyone writes. Nobody limits their knowledge to just one source, do they?
Chance as a real force is a myth. It has no basis in reality and no place in scientific inquiry. For science and philosophy to continue to advance in knowledge, chance must be demythologized once and for all. RC Sproul "A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes." Mark Twain " ~"If that's not sufficient for you go soak your head."~Faith "as long as chance rules, God is an anachronism."~Arthur Koestler
In the ToE the one that reproduces more IS the favoured variety. The species will change if a new variety has an advantage in terms of offspring. If the existing variety has the advantage then the new variety will tend to be eliminated producing stasis.
In many cases selection does not favour either allele strongly enough for long enough to fix one of them, but when it does one of the alleles will be eliminated. So you are right that natural selection will tend to eliminate some alleles, narrowing the variation of the species.
This is why the modern version of the ToE proposes mutation as the mechanism by which new alleles are introduced into the species.