Darwin Proven Wrong?

[StealthySkeptic]

Public opinion in science over the past hundred years is that Darwn's theory of evolution is "true". It seems to be widely accepted because of it’s simplicity. But is it actually true?

New evidence suggests that gene mutations can either be expressed to some degree or silenced based on the specific circumstances of each individual organism. This evidence, therefore, seems to negate the assumed “truth” that gene mutations are responsible for evolution of life and the differentiation of species on earth.

Further, epigeneticists are now reporting evidence that gene expression is dynamic and influenced by all aspects of the environment. The expression markers are said to change regularly within a single lifetime as a result of environmental stimuli. This new evidence now leaves open to question every possible variable imaginable as being influential in the development and life of the organism, even those mysterious unknowns (“dark matter”, “dark energy”, “god”, “chi”, “cosmic rays”, etc).

I'm curious as to atheist perspective on this, as "atheism" seems to be a very absolute with regard to a perspective on what "cannot possibly be".

Last time I checked, oh, I don't know, the dictionary, all atheism was was a disbelief or lack of beliefs in gods. I know an atheist friend of mine who believes that Area 51 covered up Roswell, for crying out loud. However, I think the majority of us, due to our skeptical thinking on the existence of gods, would call ourselves skeptics on a variety of other issues such as Bigfoot and the Bermuda Triangle.

From what I understand (anybody who is more knowledgeable in biology, please feel free to correct me) genetic mutations are made to the base code of an organism's DNA and cannot be changed within an organism's lifetime, but can be passed on at least in part to offspring. Gene expression is already understood as the way that genetic information is interpreted by RNA so that functional proteins can be created. This absolutely can be influenced by the environment.

However, gene expression is only interpreting the blueprints (mutations). So natural selection pressures bears down on an organism and if their mutation and its expression is disadvantageous in their environment, then they'll die and not pass that on. This is basically what the modern theory of evolution is. What you seem to be saying is that just because mutations can be expressed dynamically in the environment by an individual organism, that mutations don't matter (yeah...). The best of Lamarckism combined with the best of intelligent design and pseudoscientific woo, but it's not at all going to derail the modern theory of evolution.