1. the fact that many biological phenomena can be explained by evolution is not in dispute.
2. the theory that evolution is the only engine of bio-diversification is in dispute. When I talk about EVOLUTION in the following I mean EVOLUTION AS THE ONLY ENGINE OF BIO-DIVERSITY.
3. the belief that evolution is all-encompassing, well-established, and is beyond challenge is non-scientific and irrational.

There are good theories and not so good ones.

Good theories can be used to explain observations and make predictions. Well-known theories in physics, such as Newton’s laws, Maxwell’s equations, Quantum Mechanics, Special Relativity and General Relativity are used to explain our physical world to a very high degree of accuracy. These theories were brought about by inductive reasoning from observation or mathematical logic. They have all been rigorously tested in explaining observed data and in predicting facts to be observed. Some had to be modified. Now all are recognized in their realms of science as the supreme ruler, wherein a satisfaction explanation can be derived from the theory for every single phenomenon in the physical world.

The theory of REVOLUTION pales in comparison. Just look at two recent research findings reported in our very own physorg.com. They show how incomplete this theory is in its very core competency, ORIGIN OF SPECIES. Here are the links and quotes:

--------------------
1.physorg.com/news118593251.html. “Darwin’s perception could be represented by an inverted cone with ever expanding morphological range, but the fossil record of the Cambrian Explosion and since is better represented by a cylinder with a morphological radiation at the base and morphological constraint afterwards.”
2. physorg.com/news123945544.html, and physorg.com/news127055240.html. The big shocker: Comb jellyfish – common and extremely fragile jellies with well-developed tissues – appear to have diverged from other animals even before the lowly sponge, which has no tissue to speak of. This finding calls into question the very root of the animal tree of life, which traditionally placed sponges at the base.

“This finding suggests either that comb jellies evolved their complexity independently from other animals, or that sponges have become greatly simplified through the course of evolution. If corroborated by other types of evidence, this would significantly change the way we think about the earliest multicellular animals,” said Dunn, assistant professor of ecology and evolutionary biology at Brown. “Coming up with these surprises, and trying to better understand the relationships between living things, made this project so fascinating.”

But despite these and other important evolutionary insights provided by Dunn's team, the tree of life remains a work in progress. "Scientists currently estimate that there are a total of about 10 million species of organisms on earth," says Dunn. "But so far, only about 1.8 million species--most of which are animals--have been described by science. Very few of these species have, so far, been positioned in the tree of life."

-------------------

From the first report, changing a cone-shape description to cylinder is almost as fundamental as changing the f=ma in Newton’s 2nd law to f=mv, for lack of better comparison.

One report on the 2nd research pointed out the famous Tree of Life is but a “work in progress.” How much progress, one might ask? I guess the scientist did not have 50% in mind when he used term “very few” for the portion of the 1.8 million species that has been positioned in the tree of life. I will give it a generous guesstimate of 50%, yielding less than 10% among the 10 million total species on earth. And the scientists are about to reverse the orders of some of them.

It therefore seems to me that EVOLUTION cannot explain some of the facts involving ORIGIN OF SPECIES. I put it in the category of “not so good theories,” at least for now.

While this is the case I am not surprised to see debates, challenges, other theories and assumptions, ID included. To those who are pursuing science in truth I call to respect the facts and follow them, wherever they may lead.

thunder8 quote.

Please inform us about this alternative theory! And do it with peer-reviewed, valid science! IT CAN'T AND WON'T BE DONE. FOR OVER 150 YEARS DARWIN'S BASIC THEORY HAS STOOD UP TO OVERWHELMING SCIENTIFIC SCRUTINY AND VALIDATION FROM EVERY NEW SPECIES DISCOVERED AND EVERY NEW FOSSIL FOUND. NOTHING HAS BROUGHT THE SLIGHTEST DOUBT AMONG INFORMED PEOPLE TO DARWIN'S BASIC CONCEPTS AND THE "MODERN EVOLUTIONARY SYNTHESIS" FORMED SINCE INTEGRATING MENDELIAN GENETICS WITH HIS MASTERFUL ORIGINAL CONCEPTION OF THE WORKINGS AND UNDERPINNINGS OF ALL OF BIOLOGICAL SCIENCE. EVOLUTION IS A REALLY WELL-ESTABLISHED THEORY THAT WILL NEVER BE SHAKEN FROM ITS ROCK-SOLID (FOSSIL) ROOTS. (pun intended!) (())

QUOTE

I (am) also stating that there is anther (sic) theory of evolution.