Theory of evolution is valid

Definitions. If you disagree, just let me know. mac"ro"ev"o"lu"tion G6;makr!3;-evəG2;loV2;oSHən,-G6;ēvə-/ nounBiology noun: macroevolution; noun: macro-evolution major evolutionary change. The term applies mainly to the evolution of whole taxonomic groups over long periods of time. Macroevolution is evolution on a scale at or above the level of species, in contrast with microevolution,[1] which refers to smaller evolutionary changes of allele frequencies within a species or population.[2] Macroevolution and microevolution describe fundamentally identical processes on different time scales. taxonomic group - taxonomic group (Science: zoology) A taxon with all its subordinate taxa and their individuals, for example the taxonomic group insecta consists of all insects and their taxa. Taxon Definition noun, plural: taxa (taxonomy) (1) Any group or rank in a biological classification into which related organisms are classified. (2) A taxonomic unit in the biological system of classification of organisms, for example: a phylum, order, family, genus, or species. To begin with, my understanding is that cosmic rays damage DNA, and as it heals back, this process causes randomness in genetics. Sometimes, this results in a genetic change which is beneficial for the life form, and this trait can be passed onto offspring, giving them an adaptation which, when beneficial, enables them with an advantage, enabling their line to be more successful in bringing offspring to sexual maturity, than the ones which did not receive this trait. Argument. A popular example of evolution is Darwins finches, in which morphological differences in beak size and shape allow the island diversification to persist. Birds with thicker beaks, were able to break thicker seed, and birds with longer beaks, were more able to eat from cactus without injuring themselves. There are several glaring inconsistencies, not with the observations, but with the conclusions. 1. As randomness is associated with evolution, but the traits were not random at all, as stated, birds which needed to break thicker seed, progressively got thicker beaks. 2. There has never been an enlightening observation of cosmic rays effects on DNA. More specifically, long-term evolution experiments with two populations of bacteria, one of which is shielded from background neutron radiation. According to theory, the shielded cultures should exhibit much lower rates for deleterious mutations, however it is also proposed that cancer and other mal effects are caused in part by this same process, which, is supportive of the law of Entropy, As usable energy decreases and unusable energy increases, "entropy" increases. Entropy is also a gauge of randomness or chaos within a closed system. Chaos within any closed system not specifically designed to handle such chaos, leads to disorder, not finely tuned perfection such as we see reflected in life. 3. Observed changes in life forms do not necessarily take into account environmental factors, which may or may not be observable or repeatable. For example, Birds on said island could have been the sole survivors of the severe droughts on the islands for the three years prior, leaving only the larger thicker beaked birds to carry on their genetics in the first place. It is impossible to reliably know how environmental factors effect different species adaptation to environments. 4. Evolution does not offer sufficient explanation of many complex biological systems, which without each individual component, would serve no purpose. Ex: parts of the eye, or parts of the kidneys, which, without a complete eye or kidney present to begin with, would not serve a purpose, and, according to evolution, would not have developed, or would have been useless biologically, therefore not being carried on to successive generations. 5. In the "theory of cosmological natural selection," which predicts that the parameters of physics are fine-tuned to produce many black holes, which is the case in our universe, as we see by its great chemical and astrophysical complexity. It turns out that a universe that makes many stars, and hence many black holes, is also filled with the oxygen and carbon needed for life, yet, the chance that the roughly 30 numbers"including the masses of the elementary particles and the strengths of the fundamental forces"that must be specified to describe the universe as we know it, are finely tuned to a perfection which baffles even the worlds brightest minds. Simply put, if one number was even slightly different, stars would not even exist. If stars and black holes cannot exist without the values of so many numbers being perfectly precise, then creation is in fact a miracle, only to those who disbelieve in the possibility of an intelligent engineer. 6. We should be able to find intermediate species for many species, for any given point in time, if traditional views of evolution were true. For example. We should be able to line up fossil records for each species, from their most basic forms, to their current forms as the rule, not the exception. After 150 years of geological exploration with concern to evolution, this is still not the case. 7. Intermediate species should abound around us, from many species, giving a much more diversified life even in the present. 8. Fossil records show nearly identical species from millions of years ago which still exist today, such as dragon flies, in which the only notable difference is size, indicating an environment richer in Oxygen, while somehow dodging the other processes of evolution for millions of years. Conclusion. While adaptation to environment is noted in many species on the planet, it is still conjecture to come to any solid conclusion concerning the overall validity of the modern perception of evolution, and it ignores the complexity of creation not only in individual organs in biological life forms, but even so far back as to the beginning of the universe itself.