"I am not trying to spark a debate, just an understanding. How do evolutionist account for ice ages. I mean, if we evolve according to our environment, wouldn't the mastodon shed it's fur and adapt to it's new environment when the planet warmed? Wouldn’t we see more evidence of animals evolving from cold weather animal to warm weather animals? And there have been several ice ages. Therefore, wouldn't there be some evidence of animals growing ‘cold weather gear’ and shedding cold weather gear?"
Animals cannot evolve quickly enough to respond to climatic variation. They can only modify their diets, their behavior, or perhaps migrate.
In the end, none of these may be adequate as a survival stratagem, and the animal may simply perish. This is not done without a struggle. Animals, more so than we, believe in "whatever gets you through the day".
The dietary variations of large herbivores, beavers, and deer are not the Bambi innocent munchings you may have learned about.
Further, just as there are wild variations in such things as human body hair and size differences, animals under climatic or food availability pressures may be able to respond more quickly than expected due to existing natural variants that may produce more or less thickness or coloration of fur, just as the ermine does in an annual modification.
In general, because a furry animal depends more on food resources than on the weather, climatic variation forces changes in diet more than it would be instrumental in driving the animal to grow longer or shorter fur.
Now I want to ask this: After all of these years of eating meat, wouldn't our bodies evolve wider teeth, an intestinal track that process meat better, a stomach with more acid, and saliva glands that adhere to meat eaters? Instead, our bodies can get heart disease from eating to much red meat.