You can call it chocolate cake if you wish. It is still evolution.
Evolution is change in the
heritable characteristics of biological
populations over successive
generations.
Nothing more nothing less.
I mean if you agree with the mechanics it would read as
Adaptation is change in the
heritable characteristics of biological
populations over successive
generations.
What would that change for you ? Adaptation Theory sounds more stylish ?
Adaptation is observable and can easily be explained by the presence of genes that permit variations within a specie. Dogs are a good example. Most modern breeds have been selectively bred from mongrels that have the genes of many breeds.
From Wolves to Pugs & Great Danes - the Evolution of Man's Best Friend
I note that not one animal that is not a dog has arisen from thousands of years of selective breeding.
Symbiosis kills evolution. A female wasp has to enter a fig and lay eggs. The wasp pollinates the fruit and so the fig survives. It's way more complex. The wasp stays inside the fig. The eggs become wasps. The fruit rots. A male wasp has to burrow out of the fig so that a new generation of wasps can live.
How does a wasp know to enter a fig? It can't fly out again as entering the fruit tears off the wings. The wasp lays eggs, male and female. The males and females mate, then the male creates a hole in the fig to allow the brood to escape. That's the simple version.
Without the wasp, the fig tree cannot survive. Without the fig, the wasp cannot breed. How did the wasp know to invade the fig? How did the male know to burrow out of the fig? This is just one small example. There are symbiotic relationships where only one particular insect fertilises one particular tree.
Darwin saw this as a problem: "Darwin's theory of biological change was based on competition, or survival of the fittest, among the individuals making up a species. He admitted: "
If it could be proved that any part of the structure of any one species had been formed for the exclusive good of another species, it would annihilate my theory, for such could not have been produced through natural selection" (
The Origin of Species, 1859, Masterpieces of Science edition, 1958, p. 164)."
It's just one of many problems that I see with evolutionary theory. Entropy is another. Everything declines into disorder, not order. Mammals with no more than four legs. Why not? Surely supposed billions of genetic defects would have produced something with 6 legs? And on and on it goes.
