Why is evolution hiding?

[SteelCurtain]

Do you see how this is leading you down a path? ""

Which path am I being lead down?

What I was going for there is the idea that they are feeding you falsehoods in order to get you to agree with their conclusion. i.e. "natural selection says that eskimos should be hairy, and they aren't, ergo natural selection is wrong. In actuality you wouldn't expect Eskimos to be hairy due to natural selection, because clothes.

---

On rare occasions a mutation in DNA improves a creature's ability to survive, so it is more likely to reproduce (natural selection). Does evolution have other tools for making new creatures?

Sexual selection. If a mutation makes you more virile, more sexually attractive, etc. then you are more likely to pass on your genes.

It might even work if it took just one gene to make and control one part. But parts of living creatures are constructed of intricate components with connections that all need to be in place for the thing to work, controlled by many genes that have to act in the proper sequence.

would Natural selection choose parts that did not have all their components existing, in place, connected, and regulated? Would these parts would work?

This is like the eye argument that Creationists love to parrot, even though it has been thouroughly debunked. And the answer is yes. We'll use the eye because it is an easy one. I'll let Neil deGrasse Tyson's explanation on Cosmos last week speak to this. It's at the 22 minute mark, but I would watch the whole thing for an overall look at evolution.

---

I couldn't get the video to embed, so here's the link to the page with the video embedded. http://www.openculture.com/2014/03/neil-...osmos.html

---