Best Argument for Natural Selection

     I feel as though Darwin’s best argument for natural selection seems to be the fact that organisms need to constantly be adapting to their environments.  When Darwin studied the finches in the Galapagos Islands, he noticed that the finches, although they were members of the same species had different adaptations that enabled them to survive.  Some had longer beaks which allowed them to obtain fruit more easily, while others had thicker beaks which enabled them to carrying more food in one sitting.  This alludes to the theory of “survival of the fittest” and also the idea of adapting to the environment.  The finches studied adapted to their environment over many years; the adaptations that they acquired made it easier for them to live their daily lives.  This is where the theory of “survival of the fittest” comes into play.  The finches were basically goaded to adapt over time.  This is because the finches that were considered the strongest survived and mated with others, while the weakest finches died out.  The favorable qualities of the strongest of the species were passed on and therefore the finch species evolved and became stronger. 

     This brings the tailbone on the human to mind as well.  The earliest human beings had tailbones.  Today, our tailbones are unnecessary.  We have evolved over many years to best suit our environment.  Many people argue that one day the tonsils may “disappear” as well.  The “survival of the fittest” theory does not apply to humanity any more.  It seems as though humanity is not evolving anymore.  We do not discriminate against the weak as used to be the case.  We protect the weak in society (i.e. the mentally ill and terminally ill).  Is it possible for animals to stop evolving just as humans may have?