How does your view explain such?
Why do you presume I hold a view that requires that to be explained?
Some evolutionists say evolution will lead to a necessary function and no more. How might you explain the stunning beauty and efficiency seen in creation?
I very much doubt they do. Evolution would naturally lead to more efficient and effective function. There is no mechanism that would somehow stop it at the minimum necessary. There are also added complications of constantly changing environments and overlapping functions and requirements. To take the “knees” example, they perform multiple functions and are used by different people in different ways, something that can vary significantly depending on our lifestyles.
Beauty is in the eye of the beholder so can’t really be quantified and measured in this way at all. There’s no reason something created will necessarily be perceived as more or less beautiful than something evolved or entirely random.
As for that link, I’d argue it opens with two falsehoods. “Intelligent Design” isn’t as valid as evolutionary theory because ID isn’t anything like as well defined or developed. Evolution is far from conclusive or definitive but there is vast swathes of work looking in to the specific mechanisms and processes involved. Many of the individual processes have been established even though the full end-to-end theory has not. Without any kind of clearly defined creator or mechanisms by which they’re proposed to have operated, ID has nowhere to go. It remains entirely speculative.
The second problem is the claim that science rules out the possibility of a creator. Science doesn’t rule anything out. If a specific hypothesis for a creator was defined and evidence presented to support that hypothesis, it would be perfectly valid science. None of that has been done though. Indeed, many proposed creators are defined as being specifically impossible to prove via scientific means. That isn’t science ruling anything out, it is proponents of creators ruling science out.
It also implies the myth that ID and evolutionary theory are opposites, that challenging one automatically supports the other and that it would be impossible for both to be valid at the same time. And they accuse others of being unwilling to accept alternative possibilities.