[[Technically no. If the DNA of a wolf egg were to have enough simultaneous mutations, it would be a cat.]]
Again- mutations do not add new non species specific informaiton- mutaitons can only alter informaiton lready present- species also have species speciofic paramters which dissallow being manipulated beyond those parameters to keep the species fit and viable- Your wolf will never becoem a cat- the ONLY way to accomplish that would be to add cat DNA- Cat informaiton- laterally transfered- but you’d still have the problem of the species specific metainformaiton.
[[NO. But is it statistically possible? Yes, you just have to add enough zeros.]]
Regardless of how many zeros you add or subtract, it’s still impossible- and still not statistically possible- mutaitons again, do not add information, they only alter species specific informaiton within species specific parameters- and again, we aren’t talking about just one or even a few differences between the two species but billions- and htis is just between two species- Macroevolution demands that billions of differences be somehow ADDED to each individual ‘evolving creature’, and then multiply this by billions of new species- We have absolutely zero evidence showing even a scant few such additions of NEW non species specific informaiton ,and yet apparently, we’re to beleive an astronomical amount of added new non species specific informaiton just occured ‘sometime in the past’ despite all evidence to the contrary- evidence showing species do not tolorate NEW non species specific informaiton beign added- We know from many experiments that mutatiosn do not, can not, add new non species speicific information, and that any ‘changes’ that do occure are simply species specific information changes such as 3 legs isntead of two, but no matter how many mutaitons are throw at hte species, those legs never become arms, never become wings, never become ears etc. Starting from a single cell, there would have to have been trillions of drastic new non species specific infromation added from soemwhere outside the cell, and all without detriment to hte species, and htere would have to be the possibility of creating species specific metainformaiton from scratch, and we know that ifnromation must start at hte metalevel first, and that it works downward in order to structure lower information..
The ball landing on the fence post is again, not a good example of ‘possibility’ of macroevolution for hte reasons specified above- Your ball would have had to evolve from somehtign simple like chemicals during flight, self construct itself, organize it’s own lower informaiton without the help of higher metainformation, and would have to have gained new ‘non species specific info’ in order to be able to create al lthe substructures and elements that make up the ball- again probability and impossibility are much different issues. Your ball, already compelted and functioning as a ball should, and hte fence, already intelligently created, and functioning as it should, do not represent the impossible scenario of ‘evolving’ life
Monkey versus Shakespeare. If you add enough zeros to the probability, not only does the monkey have a probability on typing the complete works without error, the monkey also has a probability for smelting iron, making the typewriter, acting out the plays and writing obnoxious reviews.
Doesn’t make it a real possibility, just one that can be calculated.