Natural Selection Seems Insufficient

[Jal]

...scientific dogmatism...

If you're in the mood for a deep dive, you might look into the "Third Way of Evolution" people. These are serious scientists who agree that natural selection is insufficient to explain the way plants and animals have evolved. 

You'll see that they are VERY careful not to associate themselves with Creationists or any sort of religious thought. As scientists, of course, they will work only with methodological naturalism. 

https://www.thethirdwayofevolution.com/

Still, they are calling for a re-evaluation of the standard model of evolution as understood today. 

One of the founders, Denis Noble, has said that unfortunately commitment to the standard model has taken on something of an ideological function. Specifically, he says that scientific researchers with genuine questions about how evolution functions may be denied funding because it is feared that their work will be used by Creationists. 

Here is the page about Dr. Noble: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Denis_Noble

You'll see from his resume that he knows something about scientific research and how to get funding.

And here is a paper published by the Royal Society challenging the idea that natural selection is sufficient to explain things:

https://royalsocietypublishing.org/rsfs/...iology-and

I was surprised to learn that Darwin himself considered natural selection to be only one of the possible means through which evolution occurs. From the article:

Ernst Mayr wrote in 1962: ‘Curiously few evolutionists have noted that, in addition to natural selection, Darwin admits use and disuse as an important evolutionary mechanism. In this he is perfectly clear’ [1]. Although Darwin disagreed with Lamarck on whether evolution had a direction (what Lamarck called le pouvoir de la vie [2,3]), he nevertheless acknowledged ‘this justly celebrated naturalist … who upholds the doctrine that all species, including man, are descended from other species' [4]. However, Darwin's multi-mechanism approach to evolution became significantly narrowed with the rise of neo-Darwinism.

As I say, none of these scientists argues for anything like divine will. But they do uphold the accuracy of this thread's title.

"One of the founders, Denis Noble, has said that unfortunately commitment to the standard model has taken on something of an ideological function. Specifically, he says that scientific researchers with genuine questions about how evolution functions may be denied funding because it is feared that their work will be used by Creationists. "

Exactly. Too much dogmatism in the scientific community. Admittedly this problem is much worse in the religious community. Almost every religious person claims to "know" stuff even though he isn't 100% sure.