We agree that species generally adapt to their environment via natural selection, though within the pre-defined limits in the organism’s genetic code. However, adaption via natural selection is unscientific no matter how it is stated, and therefore, evolution is not a rigorous scientific theory but rather a worldview.
Each method of explaining natural selection is either unscientific or does not mention adaption:
Evolutionist: Population genetics is natural selection, and it is certainly rigorous science.
Response: Population genetics is not adaption via natural selection, because before you can calculate a scenario with population genetics, you must already know the differential survival of allele pairs. You must assume adaption via natural selection a priori. 2
Site Under Construction
This site is still under construction. It needs more references, citations, and debate arguments. If you would like to help, please view the community page.
Cotner, S., & Moore, R. (2011). Arguing for Evolution: An Encyclopedia for Understanding Science. Santa Barbara, Calif.: Greenwood.
ReMine, W. J. (1993). The Biotic Message: Evolution Versus Message Theory. Saint Paul, Minn.: St. Paul Science.
- Cotner and Moore, 2011, p. 3: “When most people speak of evolution, they are talking about natural selection, one of the ways that a population can change over time. Unlike other mechanisms for evolution (e.g., mutation, genetic drift, gene flow), natural selection is the only scientifically supported explanation for adaptive change.” ↩
- ReMine, 1993, p. 171 ↩