Depending on how you define evolution, nearly everyone from hyperadaptationists like Richard Dawkins to young earth creationists believe that natural selection plays some role in diversification of species (i.e. evolution with a small "e"). But not even hardcore materialists all agree that natural selection is the primary mechanism that explains all the things that "have the appearance of design" in the biosphere. This is the source of the contention between Paul Nelson and Jerry Coyne, and in fashion typical of biology academia, Jerry Coyne rallies the troops to aver triumphantly that Natural Selection must play some role in macroevolution, even though many of them believe that selection is a poor general explanation for biological innovation.
That is to say, selection is part of this balanced theory. Which sounds familiar:
The ["part of this balanced breakfast"] claim is technically a legal requirement, but, like a Stealth Cigarette Commercial, the companies have hidden the obvious beneath the implications. After all — really! — if you're still hungry after eating a bowl of cereal, you don't cook yourself some bacon and eggs, or make toast. You just grab the cereal box and pour yourself another bowl.
In other words, your Choco Woofers are "part of this complete breakfast" in much the same way that chocolate cake is "part of a complete dinner": as a tasty dessert that doesn't add anything to the meal but calories.
And in much the same way that Natural Selection is part of the explanation of biological diversity as macroevolutionary descent with modification.
|Part of this balanced explanation!!!!!|
Here is further evidence that the theory of evolution (which one?) is as well-established as the theory of gravitation. It might be better to describe it as an explanation in search of an actual theory.