Adaptation is not Evolution

Votaries of minerals-to-microbiologist evolution are confused by the meaning of evolution, and they spread their tohubohu to the public. We often see them conflating evolution with variation. In a similar way, adaptation is interpreted as evolution. They conveniently skip over basic science and observational skills.

Creatures were designed to adapt but not to change into something else
Red-browed finch image by John Manger / CSIRO (CC BY 3.0)
(Usage does not imply endorsement of site contents)
When you see finches, you can see variations and adaptation. When you see dogs, you see variations and adaptation. You do not see anything changing into something else. Big and little, long and short, different colors, speciation — each staying within the boundaries of its own kind with a little help from genetics.

Darwin's disciples generally follow his teachings that some vague, undefined external pressures caused organisms to change. As we have seen in the articles linked here on engineered adaptability (such as "Engineered Adaptability or Intangible Evolutionary Forces?"), critters were designed by the Master Engineer to be able to adapt. They change because they were built that way. External pressures are not the leading cause of change, and Darwinian evolution has nothing to do with it.
Due to the bombardment of evolutionary propaganda, most people think the terms evolution and adaptation basically represent the same thing. But nothing could be further from the truth. When one has a proper understanding of how creatures adapt and the incredible complexity of the mechanisms that enable them to do so, logic points to an all-wise Creator as adaptability’s cause. The scientific reality of the engineered complexity of adaptation is actually contradictory to the man-made myth of step-by-step gradual evolution over time.
To read the rest, click on "Are Evolution and Adaptation the Same?"