And that's because the gatekeepers of the science establishment consider any close critique of Darwin to be prima facie unscientific.
Incredibly, Darwin is to the 21st century what Aristotle was to the 11th.
Let us review: Science relies on forming a hypothesis, testing the hypothesis through experiment, and evaluating the results of the experiment to determine whether they support the hypothesis. Science thrives on such things as sharing of data, reproducible results, and peer review.
The entire world would welcome a well-designed, controlled experiment that would either prove or disprove speciation through natural selection. Without that, however, all that Darwin and his disciples have provided us with is a hypothesis...and acceptance of it then becomes philosophy, not science.
Of course everyone is welcome to his or her philosophy, but let's call it what it is, all right?
How so? Evolutionary theory is constantly changing and constantly being critiqued by scientists. While they don't dispute the general concept of evolution, it is the details where the controversies lie. An entire theory that has managed to explain thousands of facts for over a hundred years and grounded in solid evidence is not rejected easily.
The mere problem is - there is no other available, scientific theory at the moment except evolution on this matter.
What are you talking about? There have been numerous experiments in speciation. Are you being selectively blind?
BTTT