CTD, there really is no issue here. And the dichotomy you are seeing does not exist. Do you not think that availability of food, water, and other natural resources has some impact? Do you think the environment has no effect on a species, even when they over-exploit it?

Let's look at natural selection again. Darwin and Wallace actually found their inspiration for this idea in economics. An English parson named Thomas Malthus published a book in 1797 called Essay on the Principle of Population in which he warned his fellow Englishmen that most policies designed to help the poor were doomed because of the relentless pressure of population growth. A nation could easily double its population in a few decades, leading to famine and misery for all.

When Darwin and Wallace read Malthus, it occurred to both of them that animals and plants should also be experiencing the same population pressure. It should take very little time for the world to be knee-deep in beetles or earthworms. But the world is not overrun with them, or any other species, because they cannot reproduce to their full potential. Many die before they become adults. They are vulnerable to droughts and cold winters and other environmental assaults. And their food supply, like that of a nation, is not infinite. Individuals must compete, albeit unconsciously, for what little food there is.

Natural selection, and evolution, were ideas which explained the evidence, and they have been put to the test for 150 years. Evidence that population pressure must exist? We are not knee-deep in beetles or earthworms.

Look around you at what's happening with humans. The population of the earth has increased by a few billion in my lifetime alone, and I'm not that old. If your criticisms are valid then they mean that the human population will be able to increase indefinitely, and the earth will be able to provide for its needs indefinitely. This clearly is not the case. It has been estimated that it would require several earths to meet the needs of the existing population if all people consumed as much as those in the developed western world do.

Quote
for the apparent majority of lifeforms which do regulate their own numbers


So the limitations of the available resources have no impact on them whatsoever? You're going to have to provide some evidence that this is the case for a species.

Quote
The problem for evolutionists is that self-regulated populations don't get dense enough to result in the kill-off of the "unfit".


Gosh, I'm going to have to ask for that E-word again.

Natural selection actually explains what many scientists have observed for a long time. You're taking denial of evidence to great heights but you're not offering any proof. The passage you quoted from Darwin simply gives his ideas about natural selection; I'm not sure what you were trying to prove with it exactly.