Hello,
So yes, there are standards that have to be kept.
A cohesive theory is one that sets out to complete what was undertaken, not beach halfway - in the context of Evolution, it is evident from the fact that it cannot be simplified, that Darwin was not intent on the theory culminating in something specifically meaningful: his thoughts were gibberish, in principle.
I can simplify the Bible - "it was, it began" - and if that was all that you ever knew about it, those words would still save you from a Hell separated from God - on the other hand it can be expanded into Old and New Testaments, with a fractal like quality, delimiting for how long you should ponder life and to what end. I can even over-simplify the Bible, but for that I receive the punishment associated with such an act, spiritually - if nothing else.
So we have two paths, before us: do we simply add to what was never intended to finish, completely foolishly? Or do we work with the text in which we have faith: regardless of how much is gained or lost in the manner we approached it? It is not necessarily given that these developments are irreversible: the unending can end, the ended can regrow - it is not determined that one steals our freedom or the other one grants it: only that something of some sort must happen, while we have time on Earth, lest the greater portion of what is possible now, be lost.
A working theory, is possible. It takes beginning and ending conditions and a determination not to let one settle without the other, when both are needed. If it can be simplified it be communicated and that can only be a good thing. Should we be trapped, we need to start again; should we be confused, we need to study more carefully. This is the process of engaging meaningfully with something that has been offered to have been understood - unless, pray tell, your understanding is itself to you a ruse? I pray with long suffering that this not be the case, but that your theory become more porous, more able to draw in and establish - where indeed all Christ, the very Creator, comes to a head.
Not that it is wrong to set out to have approached an unreconcilable digmatic, but that to call that digmatic the truth or more like it, is a forgery.