Take a look at this page, specifically the image of the Basket Star, https://www.newscientist.com/gallery/dn19136-secrets-of-backboned-life-found-on-undersea-mountains/6. Notice that the text states, "Its arms have evolved to form an intricate spiderweb." This is a brand new species. Never before seen by human eyes. These scientists know nothing about it, except that they think it is in the starfish family. They have never seen one before, never seen any fossils of it, haven't done any biochemical or DNA analysis, etc. and yet they say its arms have involved into an intricate spiderweb.
Without any foundational basis what so ever, other than their inherent evolutionary bias, the statement is made that this organism looks like it does because of evolution. It's very interesting that even when evolutionary scientists find that they have what they claim is a fossil record of an organism over tens of millions, or even hundreds of millions, of years and it is unchanged - the organism looks exactly the same over millions and millions and millions of years - they don't have any idea why that would be.
Evolution dogma states that natural selection should be acting on, creating change in, the organism's appearance over time. But they never see any change. The organisms always look the same and evolutionary scientists don't know why. Creationists know why it is - because the organism was created to look like it does and is only a few thousand years old, not hundreds of millions. For a related discussion, see our post about the pelican fossil.
Dr. Hardin addresses the issue of natural selection and other evolutionary biases in our book The Philosophy & History of Origins: A Practical Look at the Scientific Merits of the Creation and Evolution Models.