Engineered Adaptability or Intangible Evolutionary Forces?
We have been seeing how Darwin's followers have been appealing to ad hoc stories, unscientific and illogical hypotheses, incompetent evosplaining, and even animism to keep their pantheistic worldview intact. They even resort to evolutionary teleology, which is contradictory to their belief system. I reckon that they know their beliefs are not supported by science, and are simply the product of desperate, blind faith. They are also determined to find excuses to deny their Creator at almost any means available.
In the Engineered Adaptability series, we have seen that Darwin believed in external influences to cause evolution. This idea is not tenable, though evolutionists persist in continuing to ride that owlhoot trail. Instead, evidence shows that organisms have been engineered to adapt to conditions, instead of having conditions force them to evolve.
Naturalistic scientists are further increasing their mystical views in natural selection (I'll get to that in a later post), and appealing to external "selection pressures" as well as the fact-free concept of "convergent evolution".
It is interesting that evolutionists insist on the "fact" of minerals-to-minerologist evolution, but when something is found in nature that has been deemed extinct for millions of Darwin years, then found alive and virtually unchanged from the its fossil record counterpart, it was "stasis". That is, it did not have to change. That means for all that alleged time, there were no environmental "pressures", no genetic changes, nothing happened because it wasn't needed. Yeah, that's "science", old son, and it covers everything but explains nothing.
In reality, the sans science, sans facts, sans reality rescuing devices deny the evidence. The evidence shows that the Master Engineer designed organisms to adapt. But they were not designed to change into something completely different.
 |
| Credit: Pixabay / Christian Reil (slightly modified) |
Naturalistic scientists are further increasing their mystical views in natural selection (I'll get to that in a later post), and appealing to external "selection pressures" as well as the fact-free concept of "convergent evolution".
It is interesting that evolutionists insist on the "fact" of minerals-to-minerologist evolution, but when something is found in nature that has been deemed extinct for millions of Darwin years, then found alive and virtually unchanged from the its fossil record counterpart, it was "stasis". That is, it did not have to change. That means for all that alleged time, there were no environmental "pressures", no genetic changes, nothing happened because it wasn't needed. Yeah, that's "science", old son, and it covers everything but explains nothing.
In reality, the sans science, sans facts, sans reality rescuing devices deny the evidence. The evidence shows that the Master Engineer designed organisms to adapt. But they were not designed to change into something completely different.
Darwin’s followers appear to be comfortable embracing totally contradictory explanations for the same thing. When diverse groups of organisms share nearly identical traits, evolutionists see that as solid evidence of descent from a common ancestor. But when similar traits can’t be due to common descent, they see it as equally solid evidence for evolution. This is called “doublethink” in George Orwell’s classic novel 1984, which features a fictional totalitarian regime that cunningly uses misnomers or deceptive redefinitions as a means of thought control.To read the rest of this very interesting article, click on "Engineered Adaptability: Active Environmental Tracking Explains Similar Features". You may also want to see a closely related post, "Sensors Engineered in Living Things".
You have to pay close attention to disentangle evolutionary “doublethink.” The fact that many organisms share highly similar, non-inherited traits is actually strong evidence against evolution, pointing instead to the information underlying common design. So, evolutionists invented convergent evolution, a mental construct devised to rescue their theory from conflicting observations. For example, they claim the echolocation ability shared by some bats and whales somehow evolved convergently through identical genetic changes in both groups.