This is probably a feature, not a bug:
Evaluating the legacy of Charles Darwin is a complex task. On the positive side, Darwin helped biologists to appreciate how organisms change with time to better survive in shifting environments. Before his views became popular, many saw species as static entities, so they did not fully appreciate the historical factors shaping such observations as diminished eyes in cave fish.
In addition, Darwin illuminated how variation in populations (e.g., differences in size and coloration) enabled species to better adapt to their surroundings. This insight was later integrated with genetics and mathematics in one of the great scientific achievements of the 20th century, known as population genetics. The resulting set of tools has proven invaluable in such fields as virology and environmental science.
On the negative side, Darwin asserted that adaptation is driven by natural selection, which he portrayed as a creative force that reshaped organisms. This illusion has consistently confused biologists over adaptation’s true nature…
The central problem with such claims is that the environment is not conscious, as depicted, e.g., in the Disney movie Pocahontas. It cannot select, mold, tinker, instruct, or perform any such actions reserved to intelligent agents. The most astute philosophers of science and biologists have called for the purging of such pseudoscientific thinking from biology.
Brian Miller, “Darwin’s Theory of Natural Selection Has Left a Legacy of Confusion over Biological Adaptation” at Evolution News and Science Today (September 20, 2021)
Miller cites Jerry Fodor in this, as well he should. See Fodor’s What Darwin Got Wrong (2010).
He quotes, “Indeed the language of neo-Darwinism is so careless that the words ‘divine plan’ can be substituted for ‘selection pressure’ in any popular work in the biological literature without the slightest disruption in the logical flow of argument. – Robert G. B. Reid, Biological Emergences: Evolution by Natural Experiment, Pp. 37-38”
That’s a devastating indictment, given that the whole point of Darwinism was to demonstrate that life could come into existence purely by random processes.