Gallarenter's criticism of intelligent design is that if there was an intelligent designer, his strategy is unclear—why did he design so many doomed organisms, waste energy on evolutionary dead-ends, and create a world where creatures are disease-prone and heartbreak-prone rather than optimizing design?

Darwin successfully explained small adjustments by which organisms adapt to local circumstances such as changes to fur density, wing style, or beak shape, but he cannot explain the emergence of entirely new species and the big picture of biological complexity.

The persistence of Darwinism may be generational—young scholars have been 'brought up as little Darwinists' and are embedded in a Darwinian paradigm, making it unlikely the field will quickly overcome Darwin even if the theory is false.

Post-neo-Darwinian evolutionary theories are emerging that attempt to provide new mechanisms to account for things that the Darwinian mechanism cannot explain, suggesting that Darwinism has not provided a complete explanation but has created a research program that newer theories are trying to complete.

Darwinism has transcended its status as a scientific theory and has become the basis of a worldview and 'emergency religion for the many troubled souls who need one,' functioning as a comprehensive materialistic explanation analogous to Marxism, Freudianism, and traditional religion.

Gallarenter predicts that whether biology can move beyond Darwin and construct a new theoretical framework is an important open question for 21st-century science, and the speed of this transition may be generational—requiring the old guard of Darwinians to pass away before new frameworks can emerge.

Gallarenter has experienced hostile intellectual rejection from colleagues in academia for challenging Darwinism, with colleagues willing to 'destroy' him professionally if he challenged it; this demonstrates that Darwinism has passed beyond scientific argument into ideological and religious territory in universities.

If Darwinian mechanisms were true, one would not expect to find creatures that are disease-prone, heartbreak-prone, fated to die without leaving value, or subject to suffering—these observations are evidence against the view that biological organisms are products of an optimizing evolutionary process.