Natural selection, yes; evolution, no, Part Two

One shortcoming is that natural selection cannot plan ahead-an advantage one day may become a hindrance as the environment changes.  This can ultimately lead us to the extinction of a population despite its current success in the environment.  Natural selection favors specialization into distinct niches; when the environment changes, the specialization becomes a disadvantage.  It seems impossible that this process of undirected elimination could lead to an increase in variety and complexity.

Adaptations are usually presented in a way that makes that seem like a natural extension of natural selection.  There is limited evidence to suggest that natural selection can lead to new adaptations, but ample evidence shows that adaptations can lead to natural selection.  An adaptation must appear before natural selection can act on it.  Evolution cannot explain the appearance of these traits, but the Creator provided the variety needed in the original created kinds.

Science Link: https://creation.com/15-questions-for-evolutionists

GIF Link: https://giphy.com/gifs/science-QyVejAu007WdbnOfUU

Archaeoraptor: featured dinosaur from National Geographic doesn't fly

A fossil discovered in 1999 was one of many claimed by a number by a number of scientists and promoted by the media, especially National Geographic, to be a feathered dinosaur. The fossil was from a region in China that has been producing many new fossil from and changing many ideas surrounding the evolutionary history of secular scientists. The fossils was named Archaeoraptor and included a bird's upper body structure with fossilized feather imprints but the tail of a theropod dinosaur. The fossil was promoted as proof positive that birds had evolved from dinosaurs. The National Geographic article that accompanied the release of the fossil had a model of T. Rex covered in feathers. This promoted the curator of birds at the Smithsonian Institute to proclaim:

With the publication of "Feathers for T. Rex?" by Christopher P. Sloan in its November issue. National Geographic has reached an all-time low for engaging in sensationalistic, unsubstantiated tabloid journalism.

Upon further examination by various experts, it was determined that the fossil was actually a fraud. The apparent difference in the body and trail were actually different- from two different organisms. Despite the fact that this and other "feathered dinosaurs" have been shown to be fakes or misinterpretations, the media and many scientists are still claiming feathers should be shown on fossils that show no evidence of feathers.