You speak as if the theory of evolution has not itself changed since Darwin. That is, of course, false. Why would someone want to debate something that is, a best, an interesting history and beginning point. Darwin had an woefully incomplete understanding of geology and an incomplete knowledge of biology. He didn’t have DNA, radiometric dating or plate tectonics to work with. Survival of the fittest isn’t survival of the best.
Well said. Too many of those who wish scientists would just forget about the theory of evolution (ToE) do not understand this. Survival of the fittest means that the organism whose genome functions the best within its specific environment is the most likely to pass half of its genome to its offspring. There is no morality or ethics involved, no subjective measure of what constitutes fitness.
The likelihood that scientists will ditch the ToE is vanishingly small: science cannot advance without a theoretical framework, and the framework provided by the ToE works very well.