Au contraire. The entire point of the theory of natural selection is Nature is far from perfectible. And very few creatures in each generation succeed in passing on their genes to the next. We've all observed that mutations in general are harmful, not beneficial, to an organism's chances of survival. Think of cancer in the human species. So given this rule, the number of mutations that advantage a species in some way are few and between. And Nature is pitiless in making sure that those species best adapted to taking advantage of their environment live to see their genes perpetuated in their offspring. Where Darwin up-ended conventional wisdom and where it burns like a universal acid through all our comfortable assumptions is precisely in his recognition that Nature plays no favorites and all of life is governed by natural laws that have operated for billions of years long before Man stepped foot on the planet. It is that simple and undorned truth that has demolished our claim to be singularly unique in our certainty the world is perfect. Far from it and its certainly much more understandable once we accept the way it actually works rather than the perfection we believed in for thousands of years. In short, the natural world has never been a paradise. Here is where Darwin was a revolutionary and that is why he is still regarded as controversial. You might not like seeing life as motivated by a ceaseless drive to live, to survive, to reproduce and to ensure the survival of the species but this is what happens around us in the drama of life on earth without our even being aware of it. After reading the
Origin none of us can ever look at Nature in the same light again.
(Denny Crane: "I Don't Want To Socialize With A Pinko Liberal Democrat Commie.Say What You Like About Republicans. We Stick To Our Convictions. Even When We Know We're Dead Wrong.")
All I can say is Creation in the Bible has little words for it, the bulk of the Bible is about how sin destroys. Darwin's theory would be better challenged on that point, imo. (Then again Darwinism is not even theoretical, it's the archetype of scientific cults, selling their own product with authority in conflict of interest, but I digress slightly).