Every serious student of cause and effect, i.e. the material sciences, knows that correlation is not to be endowed with the designation,
"causation".
Correlation identifies two sets of facts, Set [A] and Set [B], then looks at similarities between the two sets in trends or other features. After finding similarities, correlation cannot produce any causation without additional facts, facts which identify the
cause of the similarity as being due to the actual cause of the target set of facts. It is always false to say that if Set [A] and Set [B] appear to have similarities, then one set caused the other.
This issue is even more severe for evolution, because one set is a loose amalgam of individual static facts which do not provide any objective proof of evolution, and the other set is a “mountain” of extrapolations, interpolations, opinions, and inferences: definitely
not actual objective, falsifiable facts. So any correlation which is made is between actual isolated facts on the one hand, and no facts at all on the other hand. For evolution, not only is the correlation falsely endowed with causation as the isolated individual facts are
compared (with science fiction stories supplied specifically for the purpose of correlation), but also the entire premise is fatally flawed by the lack of a factual set against which to “correlate” with the isolated facts of the original set. So even the attempt to correlate fact with fiction is a logic fallacy.
Set [A (facts)] cannot be logically correlated with Set [B(non-facts)].
Each of the two flaws, 1) use of correlation as causation and 2) correlating facts with non-facts, are individually fatal to the “necessary intellectual process” demanded by Evolution. So Evolution is
doubly false when making such claims, and such claims are all that evolutionists are capable of providing.
There is every reason, if one is devoted to actual logic first and foremost,
not to accept any pursuit which attempts to make such a correlation. And when the pursuit
requires such fallacious faux correlation to be accepted as “Truth” and “the only Truth”, it is obvious that that pursuit has no dedication to either logic or rational thought.
Further, the attack on those who DO accept logical requirements before any acceptance of this sort of claims of Truth is purely an act in blatant support of irrationality. The motivation for that is clear, because the cultish quality of such demands leads straight back through the false hypothesis of Philosophical Materialism to the necessary irrationality of Atheism
(Neither Philosophical Materialism nor Atheism can prove the foundational claims underlying their propositions or worldviews; but both require a physical, material creation story, and evolution, they claim, is the only story available – ignoring all the falsifiers of course).
So not only is such a pursuit demonstrably fallacious, it is also demonstrably ideologically motivated similar to cultism.