One species having binocular sight does not significantly effect the evolutionary advantage of binocular sight in other species. And define what you mean by "h

One species having binocular sight does not significantly effect the evolutionary advantage of binocular sight in other species. And define what you mean by "high probability", I would agree that intelligence (as defined as building radio communications) does not have a high probability of evolving compared to binocular sight. What I am getting it, is I would not be surprised if intelligence (building radio communications) was like a race. A race only has one winner. Just because a race may have a thousand contestants, does not mean that the probability of there being a winner if 1/1000. Rather the probability of there being a winner goes to 1 as the duration of the race increases. Or its like concluding that because life only appeared once on this planet, its very unlikely that life could have appeared at all. Another hypothesis is that once life appears, it makes it very difficult for new life to appear by preventing the conditions that lead to abiogenesis. For example maybe chemical evolution can not occur, because in all places where it would the are living organisms that interrupt the process because those chemicals are useful to the organism. Similarly, I Humans have an unprecedented degree of control over the evolutionary trajectories other organisms. Maybe other apes, if left alone for hundreds of millions of years would evolve into a species that develops radio communications. But organsim's need evolutionary pressure to evolve, and humans really, really like preserving species. If a species of apes start dying off due to some evolutionary pressure, rather than let nature take its course and let the apes which can survive that pressure out compete the others, humans will intervene to keep them around, and as a result they will remain stagnant evolutionary.