Natural selection does not obligate eliminating something with no discernible benefit if there is likewise no discernible harm. If it arises as a fluke, and there’s no harm in it being there, it doesn’t get actively selected out.
As for “excess brain capacity”, the “only 10% used” meme has long been shown/traced as a popular misrepresentation of a more obtuse fact. Dunno about you, but I’m using most of mine.
I did not say that natural selection was obliged to remove things that no longer had function in fact I would expect the opposite...
As for brain capacity again I’m simply making a statement that it is commonly stated that we have excess brain capacity that we don’t use that is not compatible with the theory of natural selection so one of the other should to be incorrect to some degree.
I do not dispute natural selection, any animal breeder to basically demonstrated when you cull an animal...you select some, remove other to reproduce a trait
That the natural environment might cull out or favor a particular animal trait is completely rational...
But it is also true that natural selection its not the only species creation mechanism nor can any species be proven to be natural vs intelligently created...
we currently create new species through genetic manipulation and modification there’s no scientific tests to determine if a particular species was created versus naturally evolved.... so if you can’t prove one of the other going forward you sure as heck can’t prove it going back and have to be honest enough to state as such
and the natural selection process itself cannot function unless something is already reproducing for natural selection to favor a trait in the first place...therefore by simple logic tells you that at least the first life form could not naturally evolve....
again I’m not arguing for intelligent design I’m simply pointing out that you have to take natural selection in context it is not the panacea of all creation nor can it be proven as such ...
So to be intellectually honest you have to have mind open to additional mechanisms else you’re being intellectually dishonest and being just as dogmatic irrational as some accuse religious fundamentalist of being