Buuh? Evolution is an actual scientific theory, I assure you.
Like @some_guy, I would really appreciate if you’d talk more about which scientific theories you think ToE violates, or at least link to some sort of literature that makes this case in an intellectually honest way.
Now, it is true that there are always evidential anomalies for any given scientific theory. Newton’s theory of gravity had its predictions about the perihelion or Mercury’s orbit and properties of the luminiferous aether, for example. I’d argue that its replacement – General Relativity – does not predict dark matter and dark energy and that they therefore constitute anomalies for General Relativity.
But to replace Newton’s theory of gravity, you needed some similarly predictive theory such as general relativity. Science doesn’t really proceed via falsification – you don’t throw out an incredibly useful theory because it fails one or two tests. You have to propose a similarly predictive theory.
Incidentaly, “God made that” is not a predictive theory. Any set of facts is consistent with the hypothesized desires of an omnipotent entity, because such a thing could make literally anything happen. So “intelligent design” cannot be the sort of theory that could ever replace evolution. You’d need something better than evolution.
But realistically, evolution is so well-confirmed that it seems unlikely that the core idea will ever be rejected any more than the core idea of gravity changed when relativity was adopted: people still think gravity makes masses attracted to each other even if they change their mind about how it actually does that. Similarly, our understanding of evolution is changing all the time: research suggests that it may be more sudden in some limited cases than many 20th century geneticists believed (revival of the “hopeful monster” hypothesis), that viri and parasites play a much larger role in evolution than ever before supposed; there have been many findings about the ways in which DNA is not simply like computer code, and it’s been discovered that some sections of what was once called “junk DNA” are actually functional and very important. But none of that really calls into question the core insight that life on earth evolved via natural selection among variations caused by genetic mutation.
Also note that it was scientists using evolutionary theory and the evidence at hand to come to those conclusions, not laypeople who don’t believe in evolution for spiritual reasons.
