MV writes:
But the same do darwinists.
I am not sure if you understand what teleology is, but evolutionary biology has no part of it. Teleology refers to the implication that events happen for specific reasons and toward some sort of end goal. This seems to be what you are implying, but it is not consistent with a scientific explanation of anything biological.
MV writes:
They underlay to the phenomenons of mimicry their unwaranted myth of random mutation and natural selection as the only possible explanation.
We would not argue it is the only 'possible' explanation, only that it is the only adequate explanation based on the evidence. There is good evidence that both random mutations AND natural selection occur, and that living things are shaped by these processes. There is no evidence for teleology in all of biological science.
MV writes:
Panaxia quadripunctaria for instance has patterns that it can completely "disappeared" amongst leaves of prickly plants.
This is simple evolution of camouflage. Happens all the time. Every group of insect offspring are a little different from each other purely by chance. The more an insect happens to blend in with the background of its prefered habitat, the less often it happens to be eaten by visually-searching predators, hence such adaptive patterns are gradually adopted and improved on over many generations. I don't see what is so difficult to accept.
MV writes:
And how is it possible that insects with totaly different body plans as plants, that they can "mimics" plants with different logic of development?
Easy. You can paint the same portrait using watercolors, oil paints, or acrylic and still achieve much the same depiction of someone. There are multiple different developmental paths that can, under selection, evolve to produce things that are superficially similar in appearance, even though they are completely un-related and made up of different structures entirely.
Edited by EZscience, : No reason given.