So that leaves us with a bunch of physical evidence that seems to suggest a long term biological process, a methodology that relies on mathematical modeling submitted as the only “correct” way to interpret that evidence, and nobody knows how to actually apply the methodology to the evidence.
I do not read that as a substitute for evolution theory.
However, should geometric physics continue to progress along the lines of additional expanded temporal dimensions, wherein time is not a line but a plane or volume, then I would not be surprised if a future biologist offered Rosen's model as compatible since it entails final cause while being agnostic towards supernatural cause.
Darwin's theory relies on a time line, an arrow of time. And other explanations, such as William's inversely causal meta-information, suggest supernatural cause, i.e. God.
Or to put it another way, advances in theoretical physics may force biologists to consider non-physical causes but I suspect they would prefer any model that does not cross the hard boundary they insist exists between science and theology.