Evolution: Monkey See, Monkey Doo-doo
In my humble opinion, the theory of evolution is nothing more than intellectual fool's tackle; that is, it appears to hold great weight, but when tested, fails. The theory seems valid because of the manner in which its proponents build into the term an inference that isn't so. As examples, the evolutionist tells us that the modern horse "evolved" from eophippus or that birds "evolved" from dinosaurs, implying that the horse and the bird are higher forms of life than eohippus and dinosaurs, that they are somehow upwardly transcendant from their ancestors. Is that so? I think not. Rather, those two are among the species (forgive me if I don't use the correct scientific terms) that have successfully adapted to changing environmental conditions throughout the ages.
In order to ascertain whether some earthly life form has actually made the transcendant leap that evolutionists imply, we must take stock of what characteristics are common to all animals and whether one, or more, possesses a trait or traits that the others do not. All animals, from humans through buffalo, snails and amoebas, ingest, digest and egest. All reproduce, are mobile, and respire. You get my meaning. In order to prove the transcendance that evolutionists imply, we would have to find an animial that exhibits a characteristic that none of the others possess. Is there one? Why, yes -us! And, what is that characteristic?
For about 14 years we had a Bichon Frise, named Daisy. As time wore on, Daisy became diabetic, went blind and acquired dementia. It was clear to us that Daisy's days were numbered. But, Daisy didn't know she was going to die because Daisy didn't know she was alive. Unlike us, she could not conceive of her own mortality. She was intelligent, as are other animals. We know that chimps, sea otters, etc., exhibit their intelligence through tool making. But, intelligence is not perception. The ability to conceive of something externally, abstractly, larger than oneself, and to act accordingly with free will, is reserved to us alone. Many chimps have flown in space, but I doubt that any of them conceived of the idea. So there you have this single characteristic that separates us from the remainder of animals on earth. Aha!, say the evolutionists - you have just proven our point. The human ability to intellectually conceive is that evolutionary transcendant step of which we speak. Not so, sez I.
Some time ago Nova, the PBS series, ran an episode about a moth that lives in a certain English forest. The moth survived through its ability to blend in with the bark of forest trees, thus rendering it invisible to predators. A factory was built in the area, and soon began belching out smoke that darkened the trees and left the moth exposed. It was only through selection (adaptation) that darker moths survived and through inbreeding gradually became dark enough to again remain invisible (the narrator described it as the moth "evolving"). But, that was the only change that occurred in local mothdom. The moth was not altered beyond the point at which it was able to survive. The moral of the story is that Nature (or whatever term you wish to use) does not change anything more than is absolutely necessary. No other species of which I am aware is endowed with traits in excess of those required to survive in its environment.
And, that in turn raises the big enchilada question - why us? If evolution is the sole force at work, why is it necessary for us to exist? What in this world requires a being that can intellectually conceive and act with free will? Every other animal lives in harmony with its surroundings. The birds don't pollute the air, the fish don't despoil the waters and the animals don't foul the land. Why would Nature allow the development of a species that willfully destroys its own environment as well as its fellow members. Why is it necessary to have a species that blogs?
So, in the end it boils down to the questions of what and why. What was the First Cause and why are we here? And, those are questions that the theory of evolution cannot answer. So, I leave it to you, dear reader. What is the alternative?