Theories

Evolution is a source of hot debate. Fundamentalists are not the only criticizers of this foundational explanational outline for the propagation of life. For every article, study, idea, topic of interest, one will inevitably run across their counters. This is indicative of a few things. One, a trespassing onto another belief in which the new violates its predecessor and is an attempt at replacement. Two, the explanation was not detailed or coherent with enough facts to stabilize its legitimacy. Three, it has too narrow of a definition, it bypasses a logical alternative, or additional probability. That is why the word set out to describe these conjectures is theory. The use of this word is to indicate that these articles and essays are a hypothesis. Theories are scientific forms of belief systems founded on facts. Making them more reliable then religious beliefs (based in blind faith and non-evidential hearsay), suggestion, or intuition. As well reasoned as they may be, this mere fact becomes a huge problem as the leaving of gaps is inherent to each system. Reasons include: expansion at a later date, inconclusive data, or information that can't substantiated. The things of life are complex; meaning the devises of their explanation would be to an equal degree. Everything can not be one thing. If this were so then there would be one point from which all to view. We understand through our many differences that this is not the case and that things can not be explained or determined by one system alone. There are too many influences, possibilities, standards, randomness etc, etc. This is why an explanation or belief structure alone could never possible encompass all things without at some point becoming disingenuous to itself. Converse arguments are crucial for the completion of a whole allowing all aspects to be considered to either validate or undermine the base leap.
This leads us to why so many theories, like that of evolution, the big bang, or anything concerned with accuracy under go revivals, revisions, restructuring. It is the approach to gaining adjoined attachments in an effort to stay relevant. It may need only some work on its peripheral aspects, an overhaul may be in order, or the structure becomes obsolete in the sense of holding weight as a legitimate argument (as with religion although there are still many believers). Such is the case in evolution. The process of Dawkins, Wilson, Grant, Smith, Mealey, etc. updating, countering, adding, or reinterpreting Darwin's fundamentals may increase the longevity of the structure. A great source of debate, this theory has so much input in it, that I believe the structure is molding into a more fully exacting account; as a larger number of situational agents are being considered. The end result is just as the word hypothesis alludes an educated guess where everything is never known. So, do our interpretation of life's events and behavior really follow this sequential chain? The answers will be left to those with faith. While the rest are out there finding their own truths (well reasoned or not).

Observation- (quotes and terms taken from Evolution 101)
If you examine this theory from a growth perspective, then its aspects of addition and subtraction are great supports for Dawkins idea of memetics. As the evolutionary theory has been subjected to the afore mentioned process it has undergone its own evolution in the realm of memes. It would even be possible to give it a familial tree charting it's progression from inception to current state; including the ideas that have perished become "extinct" along its way. Darwin's code has been altered by environmental factors such as "competition" from other memes: ideas, theories, through "genetic drift" where it has migrated from mind to mind leaving randomly selected thoughts as survivors. They have been subjected to "mutations" from encounters with addition memes and subtractive memes that are altering its code "genes". "Coevol[ving]" and growing symbiotically with assertions, developing with those that prove to be mutual beneficial in enabling it's survival, a "cospeciation" in the landscape of the mind; a meme's habitat. Proving it has been "natural[ly] select[ed]" and in current form very "adaptive" to multiple locals (minds) and times as a demonstration of how "fit" this theory actually is.