The thought process of evolution is backwards. Where else would science allow a theory to begin with a conclusion, and then reason its way backwards (not deductively), to create optimistic allegories passing as proof:
Why do giraffes have long necks?
"Giraffes have long necks because, as their environment changed, only those individuals with 'long neck genetic drift' were physically able to reach higher limbs, eat the leaves there, and live long enough to reproduce and pass on their long-neck genes."
And why does a cactus have thorns?
"Because in its environment, only those individuals with 'thorny genetic drift' were physically able to resist being eaten, and live long enough to reproduce and pass along their thorn genes."
Never mind the slow process of genetic drift; if you were a giraffe, wouldn't you be happy that, while adapting to their environment, cacti didn't cross-breed with trees?
How would giraffes lucky enough to evolve with long necks have survived if trees had started sprouting thorns instead of leaves?
South African Cactus Tree
Hmmmm.
How would giraffes lucky enough to evolve with long necks have survived if trees had started sprouting thorns instead of leaves?
South African Cactus TreeHmmmm.
