Can you disprove this secular argument against evolution?

This statement is not necessarily true. At any given time, there are varieties of creatures due to mutation. When the environment changes, if one of those varieties has a competitive advantage, it thrives so that its features dominate the population.Your objection assumes that the variety somehow appears as needed or in response to a change in environment or circumstance. That is not the theory of evolution. If there is not sufficient variation to fill an environmental niche in time to adapt to a change in the environment or other circumstance, then the species may not be successful in that circumstance.Edited by NoNukes, : clarify.Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.

The reason for not doing so is that your question contains an underlying assumption about evolution that nobody agrees with. The proper way to address loaded questions, such as 'have you stopped beating your wife?' is to address the false assumption. That is what folks have been doing here. They have pointed out the loaded nature of your question, and in some cases have tried to tell you the exact nature of the issue.Your response has been to belittle the responses, and then finally in the post I am responding to, ridicule the lack of directness to your BS question.You've long since crossed the line from stubborn to dishonest. I would recommend that at this point folks just let you have this particular discussion to yourself.