It is - it just takes a bit of time.NONE of that is observable in real time as a process (from start to finish), isn't it?
This is part of the scientific method - and every single result science has made involved this step.making up stuff on-paper
Without the humans interfering, it wouldn't have been a disaster at all, because there were no rabbits in Australia.the REAL LIFE "rabbits and dingos" almost ended up a disaster for the LATTER - if not for the NON-natural human factor interfering.
I fail to see the connection.So I see no reason to assume any ACTUAL "rabbits and wolves" to be capable of SELF-evolving altogether
Again, this is not a problem. There is no knowledge that flows from observation, especially without involving conjecture.and NONE were OBSERVED (from the very start) either
You don't like the scientific method very much, do you?You are free to correct me with any actual examples, but "actual" means "observed and documented from start to finish", not merely "theorized on-paper".
Evolution is not completely random, as I have pointed out above:Because under RANDOM evolution, we would definitely have more BRANCHES in vertebrates
Don't forget that there is both mutation and selection. Mutation is random, selection is not. By random chance some mutations develop, and then selection chooses according to the immediate results of these mutations - without taking long-term results into any kind of consideration.
Real time means waiting a few million years - if you can spend that time waiting, you will see it.Yet none of that is what we see in REAL TIME REALITY