[SmellyGeekBoy]

It's a shame that you're being downvoted, although I'm hoping it's more because of your tone and language than for discussing alternative viewpoints.

The fact of the matter is that the theory of evolution is the best fit for the evidence we currently have available. It doesn't mean that it's "true", and of course scientific theories have been overturned in the past as new evidence has become available. So while the theory you put forward is certainly possible, I'm not familiar with any actual evidence for it. Can you point us to any?

(I'm genuinely curious and trying not to come across as facetious - apologies if it seems that way)

[michaelmrose]

He doesn't want to discuss alternative viewpoints. He wants to throw mud because he can't go right out and say he's a creationist because historically this has probably hasn't gone well for him in prior discussions.

Creationism is a intellectually bankrupt dead end that gives a boring answer of "god did it" to any and all interesting questions and requires no further proof or analysis because god isn't subject to any particular rules and can in fact do it however he pleases whereas scientific theories always have edges you can pick on where things could be improved upon.

Since god did it needs no correction or analysis and provides no useful topics for discussion creationists pick at any flaw they can find in the scientific method or particular theories.

Since they rarely understand the scientific method or the thing they are criticizing in the first place such critiques are often not even wrong.

People like this are huge time wasters that will never learn anything from such discussion and rarely provide any useful data other than practice dealing with bad arguments. This is true even when the poster themselves is by other measures actually a smart person. They just create much more complicated insane models of the world that require more effort to refute.

The actually intelligent religious people have long since realized they could say "god did IT" where it is the universe rather than insisting he sit on earth creating thousands of slightly improved models of snails over the epochs in a way that looks really convincingly like evolution because this either implies he's imperfect because he didn't create the snail right in the first place or that he really likes jerking biology students chains.

[Ensorceled]

I downvoted because of tone: "It is an idiot theory that doesn't serve us at all."

I don't believe the user you are responding to is discussing in good faith, but I admire the work of you and others who are trying to educate (I'm being sincere here).

[the_af]

The details might vary (and occasionally a major mechanism may be questioned too), but the fundamentals of evolution form the core of how we think about biology, and at this point it's extremely unlikely we will find a completely alternative theory that completely discards this one.