Auronhart. You are misunderstanding and misrepresenting certain aspects of evolutionary theory.

Do you have an example of this?
Dogs.

What, did it move to a different climate just because it felt like it. (many animals form the layer of blubber for the winter and then lose it in the spring)
Perhaps its migration routes got blocked or cut off. It doesn't require extreme leaps of the imagination.

A layer of blubber could develop by positive selection for individuals that tend to deposit a greater amount of adipose tissue.

Many creationists say that there is not enough time, for example because for example the chance of a certain sequence being selected at random is nearly impossible. 'THEORY OF EVOLUTION' arising by random selection of letters is minimal. However, evolution is not a one step process. You've got to look at degrees of 'correctness'. Say, if you selected letters at random, although the probablilty that you'd get them all correct in one go is 1 in 1133827315385150725554176, the probablility of not getting any in the right place is only slightly better than 1 in 2. And since one in the right place is better than none in the right place that one correct character will persist and thus the number of incorrect characters is fewer. Thus, the number of iterations (or in biological terms, generations) to obtain the target will exponentially decrease. Naturally, the way evolution works is somewhat different, but basic combinatorics shows that evolution doesn't require timescales beyond what is suggested by geological evidence.