"Tautological fitness is when fitness is defined as survival, thereby making natural selection a tautology. To reprise:
(1) It masquerades as an explanation when it is not.
(2) It is 'always true' (by definition) and thereby is intended to capture our confidence.
(3) Tautological fitness is observable and measurable, therefore it seems like empirical science...when it is not. "
Natural Selection is not a tautology. It does not say that the *fittest* always survive to pass on their genes, but that they have a probabilistic advantage in reproductive success. Fitness is not defined as survival.
"For example, it is a fact that a tornado sweeping through a junkyard will not assemble an airplane, a house, or a watch. For the scientist it would be perverse to insist otherwise.
Yet some evolutionists do insist otherwise."
No evolutionists insist otherwise. The example of a tornado and a junkyard has nothing to do with evolution and is only proposed by those with a staggering ignorance of biological processes.
Au contraire. Gould, Luria and Singer. And that is just the short list.