>Again, this is circular logic. You assumed that the only reason that species go extinct is because it wasn’t fit enough. Again, I gave numerous examples, and

>Again, this is circular logic. You assumed that the only reason that species go extinct is because it wasn’t fit enough. Again, I gave numerous examples, and you ignored mostly all of them. Just to develop the point about extinctions a bit further. We know for instance of birds that had no natural fear of predators on the Galapagos Islands that upon human contact were driven to extinction or near extinction, and we don't need any circular assumptions to tie their fitness to their extinction. And that's not to mention the rest of the examples I listed that you ignored, such as cases where we can observe that currently living species are doing well or poorly, like algae and pandas respectively, all of which hinge on knowledge of specific biological mechanisms. So I don't know why you keep asserting that it's an assumption.