[betty boop]

In fact, it appears that the Darwinian Theory of Evolution is no more than another way of describing the readily observable and obvious Theory of Natural Selection.

Personally, I don't see any reason to expect that a bona-fide theory of Natural Selection is at all dependent on the doctrine of metaphysical naturalism, which is in turn predicated on the metaphysical doctrine of monist, deterministic, yet "chancy" materialism. (How does one make all such varied claims "add up?")

But such folk who promulgate such nonsense insist they are doing "science," by eschewing "philosophy."

Pul-eeze.... give me a break.

Separated from that background premise, Darwin's theory of natural selection might not be all that bad.

Thank you for your valuable insights, dear brother in Christ!

[TXnMA]

"Natural selection" = adaptation -- and we all know that happens.

But, Dear Sister, as you are aware, one of the reasons I eschewed that one final course in biology (and went full-out on chemistry) was that there was no way that I could see that Darwinian evolution can possibly work.

Worse, in four years, I had not been presented with a single shred of credible evidence that it had ever worked.

So, I remain, a physical chemist, forever one advanced genetics course shy of another BS -- in biology. And, I'm right where the science led me!