Paying too much attention to details and not understanding the general situation is the classic definition of NSFT.
It is my view that Darwinists have become ensnared by NSFT. As the evidence of modern science — from many domains, especially the information and computational sciences, in addition to simple mathematical probabilistic calculations — has progressively and logically eviscerated the creative powers of the Darwinian mechanism, Darwinists continue to hang on to the hopelessly improbable.
How can this be? How can the Darwinist not see the forest (design) for the trees (the endlessly unsubstantiated and usually silly or even embarrassing speculations of Darwinian storytelling, as countered by the mounting evidence of design from every sector of scientific investigation, all evaluated with simple rational thought)?
In my essay here (which has generated at this writing 182 comments) UD contributor allanius presented what I believe encapsulates and elucidates the essentials concerning this enigma.
In his comment he offers the thesis that cultural epochs are self-limiting. Proponents obtain power and dominance for a season, but are eventually brought down by their inflexibility.
Of course, the same argument might be made for religious believers. As many UD readers know, I am a former militant atheist but now an unapologetic apologist for both ID and the historic Christian faith.
Since Copernicus it was thought that materialistic “science” would eventually answer all questions and solve all problems. This trajectory seemed inevitable and irreversible.
But 20th-century science produced something entirely unexpected. The discovery of the fine-tuning of the laws of physics for the eventual appearance of living things, and the discovery that life is fundamentally based on highly sophisticated information-processing technology, threw a big wrench into the machinery of chance and necessity and materialism as the ultimate explanation for everything.
So, things appear to have come full circle.