So, to sum up:
--The mocked up pictures were meant to show the difference in camoflage capabilities between phenotypes.
--The darker phenotype increased in the population in corelation with increased pollution and darkening of tree branches.
--The moths spend time on the darkened branches of trees where they are susceptible to bird predation.
Conclusion: the increase of the darker phenotype is due to predation of the less camoflaged, lighter moths. This is an example of natural selection.
Why do creationists have a problem with this study? Is it because the pictures were stressed more than the data? Should the mocked photos be a reason to throw out solid data?
Is it just me, or do creationists avoid the data?