Evoluters are a little shy about this "sex selection" process. Many of them have abandoned it. We could forgive them if they would admit that the facts they cannot use, weigh on the side of creation.

The theory presumes that birds and bugs and butterflies have color marks and designs because for millions of years, the females selected for mates those suitors that came nearest to their IDEAL.

It sounds as convincing as a college yell.

WHERE WOULD THE LADY BIRD OR BUG OR BUTTERFLY GET THE IDEAL?

If you can imagine these creatures getting an exquisite taste from nowhere, how could it happen that all the birds or bugs or butterflies of a kind, would AGREE on exactly the same colors in the same place of the same design and stick to it for a million years?

Of all creatures, women have the best taste, yet if seven women were made a committee to select a design for an ideal man, in the end, they would submit seven designs. Yet we are asked to believe that all the females of any particular species agreed exactly on a design and refused to have mates that did not try to meet the plans and specifications.

How would that explain the markings of young birds (when different from parents), or caterpillars that are wholly different from papa and mama, or the golden trimmings of the pupa? How would it explain the marvelous beauty of creatures that are blind, as revealed or amplified by the microscope ?

These questions might be multiplied and made to include the song of birds and the bray of donkeys, but, what is the use? The stubborn facts are that most matings are determined by combat or happen-so. Common sense must be away on a vacation, if a man who knows ducks and their fondness for mud, can believe that mammy duck is concerned about the curl on the tail of her drake.