[GourmetDan]

"Natural selection doesn’t drive molecules-to-man evolution; you are giving natural selection a power that it does not have—one that can supposedly add new information to the genome, as molecules-to-man evolution requires. But natural selection simply can’t do that because it works with information that already exists."

'Natural selection' is an artifact of pre-existing biological systems interacting with physical environments. That much is observable science.

Where evolutionists become confused is in assuming that 'natural selection' created those biological systems. This is known as the fallacy of "affirming the consequent".

Contrary to popular belief, making such a fallacious assumption is not scientific deduction, it is belief grounded in philosophical naturalism.

[GodGunsGuts]

That is exactly right. Now if we could only get our FRevos to recognize the difference between emperical science and the philosophy they use to interpret the same.