The key to explaining everything in a domain is to project the data onto an explanatory space that is intuitively clear. So evolutionists project all life onto an axis defined by the extremes of law and chance. If they are presented with evidence of design, they just analyze it onto law and chance and say that’s all there is to it. Yes, this is science but poorly done.
What is a creationist axis of explanation? If we look at Genesis 1, we find two forms of creation: creation out of nothing (ex nihilo) and creation out of something (ex aliquot) as in the refinement of the earth and the forming of man out of dust. In this context they are both supernatural. After the creation week, living creatures reproduce by natural means as they were designed to do. This is a natural analogue to God’s original creation out of nothing. Creatures undergo development in their lifetime, which is a natural analogue to God’s creation by refinement. After the Fall, changes in the environment took place and reproduction generated more variability, which led to new species as well as deformed creatures.
So the explanatory axis for all of this comes from the extremes of repetition and variation held together by design. The repetition of reproduction maintains life on earth. Variations of life that fill out the earth and the possibilities of harmonious variety were designed in from the beginning to unfold over time (the original meaning of the word ‘evolution’). Functions that have only survival value are post-Fall — their possibility was allowed from the beginning but were only triggered after the Fall.