I stated exactly why the adaptation of the finches is not evolutionary in my post:
Another example is the Galapagos finches. The rains there are very variable. Remember the El Nino? Comes every seven or eight years? This causes constant changes and is the source of the increase and decrease in beaks in the finches. If forces them to constantly adapt back and forth. If evolution were true and these beaks changed due to mutations, they would not be able to do that. Because evolution is false and the finches's genomes are able to adapt the size of the beaks without mutation they can adapt to the periods of high and low rainfall which constantly occurs there.
Now the above clearly cannot be evolution, yet this is one of the two favorite examples of evolutionists for micro-evolution. The other favorite example is the moths and we know that that study was fraudulent. What this means is that evolutionists cannot even give proof of micro-evolution let alone give proof of the transformations necessary for one species to become a new more complex species.