Hello everyone, I am William Brookfield founder of ICON-RIDS. I am an ID evolutionist not a Darwinian evolutionist.
The first order of business here is Darwin's mechanism of speciation. This mechanism is a hoax. Both natural selective destruction and randomization (RM) are destruction functions. It is not logically possible for a destruction(-) functions to produce new construction (biological or otherwise). It is not logically possible for new structures (+) to arise by destructive (-) agents. Darwin's thesis regarding the "origin (construction) of new species (new structure) by means of natural selection" (selective destruction) is thus logically and causally bankrupt.
The normal course of argument taken by Darwinists at this point is to claim that any such doubts about Darwinism are "religiously motivated" and therefore beneath consideration. This isn't going to work here.
After 150 years of Darwinian obfuscation, it is time for humanity to take back its power and rid itself forever of this hoax.
Charles Darwin (quoted from) On the Origin of the Species, by means of Natural Selection -- 1859
"[The]preservation of favourable individual differences and variations, and the destruction of those which are injurious, I have called Natural Selection, or the Survival of the Fittest." -- C.DARWIN sixth edition Origin of Species -Ch#4 Natural Selection
"Natural Selection is daily and hourly scrutinising, throughout the world, the slightest variations; rejecting those that are bad, preserving and adding up all that are good". -- C.DARWIN sixth edition Origin of Species -- Ch#4 Natural Selection
Darwin's "preservation of all that is good" assumes the design of a vehicle capable of carrying forward "all that is good." This "preserving all that is good" occurs in utter defiance of the thermodynamic gradient -- that by law (2nd law) destroys all that is "good." The more "good" to be carried forward, the better designed this living and reproductive vehicle (species) has to be. Arguments against design cannot just assume design. What Darwinists have provided is merely Natural Selective Destruction (destructive filtration) plus a worthless and obfusctating circular argument pertaining to the "good."
"Macro-evolution" is an extrapolation of "micro-evolution." Microevolution" in turn, is dependent upon each species' flexibility. This flexibility/adaptability, is itself a positive design attribute that requires an explanation. Galapagos finches that would immediately choke and die on the first drought-hardened seeds are easy to design compared to Galapagos finches that can adapt and survive in the face of countless environmental assaults. A computer program that can barely run in a single computer environment is far easier to design than a program that can itself adapt, self correct and thrive in countless computer environments (PC, MAC, Unix, Atari etc.,) If living species were more poorly designed they would immediately drop dead in response to the slightest environmental change -- and there would be no Darwinian "evolution." The genetic information corresponding to every single environmental change has to be in place before any organism can "evolve" in response to selective pressure. Darwinian theory therefore, has no validity of its own and is wholly parasitic upon exquisitely competent design. The bottom line is that adaptable species are exponentially more information-rich than species that are not adaptable. Thus, all of the "evidence of evolution" (peppered moths, bacterial antbiotic resistance etc.) is in fact evidence for design. -- WB