Can adaptation and natural selection be considered acts separate and distinct from the process of evolution?

…to what end?

An individual’s adaptation has either a positive or neutral effect on evolution, by either allowing it to breed more that it otherwise would without the adaptation, or by having no effect on breeding or, should the adaptation fail, killing the individual before it can breed.

If enough of the individual’s descendents carry that adaptation to sufficiently alter the species’ population, that is the very definition of evolution.

No.
Those are essential aspects of evolution.

No. Without them there is no evolution.

Guess that’s the end of that!

No, they are the machinery of evolution.

No. They are all part and parcel of the entire evolution gig.

I don’t want to seem redundant…... so I won’t.
Where’s the bar?

Natural selection is absolutely not essential to evolution. Evolution is defined as a change in the frequency of an allele or alleles in a population. There are multiple mechanisms by which this can occur, and natural selection is only one of them.

Adaptation is a consequence of natural selection. Not all evolutionary change is considered to be adaptation.

Here’s a resource that you might find helpful if you are having trouble distinguishing these terms.