Evolution should try joining mainstream science where best answers coalesce when one observes, measures, replicates by experiment, and computes formulas for a phenomenon. Examinations for many physical events have not reached this four-fold rationality.
One example is String Theory, or the “theory of everything”; everything for atomic, micro-processes. Mathematical models utilize eleven dimensions to unify gravitational, electromagnetic, and nuclear strong and weak forces. Here is computation without experiment, measurement, or observation. Niels Bohr would say, “Yes, yes you have the mathematics. But does it make sense?” Notable critics say scientists utilizing mathematics inadvertently venture into philosophy and/or religion.
The other extreme is Macroevolution, where all is observation. Rigorous measurements and experiments would require 1,000 to 10,000 times recorded history. Advocates contemplate observed phenomenon, and decide Macroevolution explains everything. Yet this theory fails computational testing, with vanishing small probabilities using Thermodynamics, which covers all macro-processes.
Evolution advocates should consider natural processes in open systems, as required by natural selection, and note consistent increased disorder, release of energy, and increased entropy. Absent intentionality, even huge energy inputs result in Katrina, and not the Brooklyn Bridge.
For just one hypothesis biased in their favor, assume that during a time span one minute short of eternity there are 182,000,000 steps through the vagaries of chemical reaction, environment, and predator events from the first one cell animal to man. If 181,999,500 steps have an absolute certainty of occurring, and the remaining 500 have a 90% probability of occurring, then the chance Macroevolution explains the presence of humans is 0.000000000000000000000013220708.
Rigorous debate continues concerning String Theory, but debate is prohibited concerning Macroevolution. Advocates contend contrary arguments require the intrusion of God. Yet good theologians of desert religions would say a god hedged in by observation, measurement, experiment, and computation equates to the Golden Calf the Israelites constructed in the Wilderness. Their God can only be found by mystical, faith encounters.
Hooda, yabba, whatsamajiggee? That’s enough empty, pompous verbosity to qualify from some left-wing social-science, deconstruction theory, feminist critique magazine. Perhaps the “Science” section of the New York Times will publish it for you.