Darwin Proven Wrong?

[sswhateverlove]

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?

It's had over 150 years of further development and new discoveries, so the current theory is much more nuanced.

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.

Now you're no longer even talking about Darwin's theory, since he was not aware of the existence of genes when he published. All he knew on the mechanism of heredity was that organisms vary from generation to generation, and that those variations are heritable.

That said, 'seems to negate the assumed 'truth' that gene mutations are responsble for evolution of life and the differentiation of species' does not follow from 'evidence suggests that gene mutations can either be expressed to some degree or silenced based on the specific circumstances of each individual organism'.

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).

And 'seems to negate the assumed 'truth' that gene mutations are responsble for evolution of life and the differentiation of species' doesn't follow from that, either.

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".

There is no atheist perspective on this. An individual atheist's opinion on it will be based on what they find plausible. Most Western atheists will defer to the experts in the relevant fields precisely because they don't view their atheism as impinging on the facts of the matter.

a·the·ism/ˈāTHēˌizəm/
noun
disbelief or lack of belief in the existence of God or gods.

What in that definition leads you to believe that atheism seems to be 'very' absolute?

To clarify, gene mutations and changes to gene expression based on methylation and histone protein status are not the same thing. The latter seems to be negating the former, in my opinion. What is yours?