Evolution is the best and only explanation for the diversity of life we see on our planet today.

To be clear, I like evolution. My case against the resolution, rests firmly on it not being the only explanation.To use a humorous analogy: Professionals are the best at sex, yet sex with professionals is not the only sex.Rebuttals:"I thought you would just accept the debate for the first round"Based on you making arguments in the first round, I assumed such was not in place.In future debates, please set that as a rule."There is no other theory that even comes close to the explanatory & predictive insights that evolution offers."Please note, Round2 was when pro backed down from it being the "only explanation" as the resolution insists. He even alluded to there being other theories."By contrast, the mechanisms that bring evolution about certainly need study and clarification." -Theodosius DobzhanskyA quote like this, probably leads people to wonder about Intelligent Design as a simplified explanation for evolution. As included in such mechanisms that are not fully understood, are things like background radiation (also known as invisible forces that shape our lives, and even kill unsuspecting people by giving them cancers)."Life on Earth evolved gradually beginning with one primitive species..." -Jerry CoyneThank you for giving a respectable quote and source, to what I already explained in Round1. "Life was once singular, slowly became more. Thus why every species of mammal has the same bones; even whales and dolphins have hips.""Lamarc had a alternate theory of evolution"For the sake of sportsmanship, I'm willing to let Lamarc's theory (or hypothesis?) be grouped in with Evolution; to avoid a Round2 concession by pro."A google scholar search of those same journals for intelligent & design turned up 50"Pro do I really have to include Intelligent Design as a part of the theory of evolution? If not you just provided a listing of 50 links, each of which would likely prove the the resolution false.Defense:"However the resolution isn't "evolution is the best explanation for the decline of diversity in species we see today or in the past.""Quite astute, the resolution remains centered on the "diversity of life we see on our planet today."Humans (much like the asteroid in the dropped dinosaur argument) acted as a force outside of those species evolution, leaving massively decreased diversity of life for us to see today.Also for future reference, please avoid double quotation marks unless actually quoting someone. For starters, it tends to look highly fallacious [5].New Arguments:I attempted to honor Pro's request to use neither ID nor Creationism, however as he then included them in his arguments, I consider that door wide open. I will however not argue in favor of the ones he suggested, that are "solely concerned with trying to poke holes in evolution mostly by criticizing old outdated..." I'll instead use explanations that were founded on something other than attacking evolution; thus while easily confused by name, they are not to be mistaken for the ones pro argued against in Round1.YEC (Young Earth Creationism)Strange as it sounds YEC passes the benchmarks set of evolution ("So there really is no other viable, robust, accepted, pursued theory of life other than evolution").It's highly visible, there's even a 70,000 square foot museum dedicated to it [6].It's so robust, it even attacks the 700 Club's Pat Robertson for lack of faith (okay so by this standard rabies would also be robust, however the infected animal needs to be robust to live so many years with it). "Not only do we have to work hard to not let our kids be led astray by the anti-God teaching of the secularists, we have to work hard to not let them be led astray by compromising church leaders like Pat Robertson" -Ken Ham [7].Accepted by lots of people.It's so pursued that it's outright hunted! Even a church leader like Pat Robertson has joined the chase [7]. Plus plenty of people trying to find science that backs it up.Granted it is a hypothesis not a theory, but the resolution of this debate is about any explanations.Young Earth Creationists (as opposed to sensible creationists) have perhaps the most complete explanation of all. They bravely ignore the mounds of evidence that would counter them [8], and stick to a single non-expanding old book for answers. By making the world only 6000 years, they have a very complete explanation for not just life, but the very universe. They never need to retract statements, because they admit to no errors. The 6000 years they've set, is less than the margin of error on how long ago the Big Bang was (a theory made by a priest, and dogmatically denied by atheists... However the origin of the universe is outside the realms of this debate). All life on this planet could fit on a single boat, and if questioned too intently they can answer 'It was a big boat.'All explanations are incomplete.Most fall to educated guesses of smart people, based on the information available at the time.Evolution: it's got at least seven competing ideas for how life began [9]. Not even factoring in how many times it died off.YEC: keeps begging the question, by saying 'God Did It,' and 'It's All In The Bible.'ID: is pretty much based on simplifying other explanations, into understandable and agreeable terms.Pastafarianism: never answers why the noodly appendage reaches out to falsify each and every carbon dating test, he just does [10]. Granted no other explanation has answered why global warming (which decreases the variety of life we see), is connected to the number of pirates. Sources:[5] http://www.fallacyfiles.org...[6] http://creationmuseum.org...[7] http://www.christianpost.com...[8] http://rationalwiki.org...[9] http://www.livescience.com...[10] http://www.venganza.org...