I agree that biological evolution isn't a major player in the cosmos, as far as we know. But I linked to an article of mine that addresses a scientific paper on a broader kind of cosmic evolution. See the link below.
And here's a paragraph from that paper:
"The universe is replete with complex evolving systems, but the existing macroscopic physical laws do not seem to adequately describe these systems…We suggest that all evolving systems — including but not limited to life — are composed of diverse components that can combine into configurational states that are then selected for or against based on function. We then identify the fundamental sources of selection — static persistence, dynamic persistence, and novelty generation — and propose a time-asymmetric law that states that the functional information of a system will increase over time when subjected to selection for function(s)."
In any case, whether you go with that Aristotelian view of nature or not, the "changes" in nature are clearly constructive and deconstructive. There's a natural order of molecules and star systems that emerged over time. To call this order a mere change is missing the forest for the trees.
