Both are post facto descriptions of an obvious nature. The presence of various species that adapt within limits has always been observed and may just as easily be "explained" by saying the various species were designed that way. The presence of many cheeseburgars at a McDonald's restaurant may be predicted just as easily as the presence of various species that adapt to their environments, yet within limits. "Natural selection" is the "goddiddit" for those who prefer to avoid notions of God. It has little, if any, scientific value but is not an unreasonable philosophy to adopt if one feels so inclined.
Both are post facto descriptions of an obvious nature.No they aren't. I don't want to get tied up in minutia, but, while I agree that you characterized natural selection as post facto, the cheeseburger example wasn't. I took you to mean that, based on past experience, one can generalize a "Theory of McDonald's," from which one can predict that a never-before-visited McDonald's will serve cheeseburgers. That is not post facto.
Let's get back to it. Please anwer clearly. Do you think that natural selection is predictive or not?