Natural selection cannot anticipate future environments on the earth. Therefore, the set of existing organisms can never be fully prepared for environmental catastrophes that await life. An outcome of this is the extinction of those species which cannot overcome environmental adversity. This failure of survive, in modern terms, can be attributed to the genomes which are unable to withstand geological vagaries or biological mishaps infections, diseases and so on). In biological evolution on the earth, extinction of species has been a more feature. The early may presently have up to ten million species, yet more than 90% of species that have ever lived on the earth are now extinct. Once again, the creationist doctrines fail to satisfactorily address why a divine creator will firstly bother to create millions of species and then allow them to perish. The Darwinian explanation for extinct life is once again simple, elegant and at once convincing—organisms go extinct as a function of environmental or biological assaults for which their inheritance deems them ill-equipped. Therefore, the so-called Darwinian theory of evolution is not a theory at all. Evolution happens—this is a fact. The mechanism of evolution (Darwin proposed natural selection) is amply supported, by scientific data. Indeed, to date no single zoological, botanical, geological, palaeontological, genetic or physical evidence has refuted either of the central two main Darwinian ideas. If religion is not taken into consideration, Darwinian laws are acceptable just like the laws proposed by Copernicus, Galileo, Newton and Einstein—sets of natural laws that explain natural phenomena in the universe.

With reference to the passage, the following assumptions have been made:
1. Only species that have the ability to overcome environmental catastrophes will survive and perpetuate.
2. More than 90% of the species on the earth are in the danger of gett1ng extinct due to drastic changes in the environment?
3. Darwin’s theory explains all the natural phenomenon.
Which of the above assumptions is/are valid?

The correct option is 1 only.

Let us analyze the validity of each assumption step-by-step based on the provided passage:

1. Analysis of Assumption 1: "Only species that have the ability to overcome environmental catastrophes will survive and perpetuate."
The passage states: "An outcome of this is the extinction of those species which cannot overcome environmental adversity. This failure of survive, in modern terms, can be attributed to the genomes which are unable to withstand geological vagaries..." and later adds that organisms go extinct due to environmental or biological assaults for which their inheritance deems them ill-equipped. This directly implies that only those species that possess the genomic/biological capability to withstand or overcome these adversities (catastrophes) survive and perpetuate. Therefore, Assumption 1 is a valid deduction based on the text.

2. Analysis of Assumption 2: "More than 90% of the species on the earth are in the danger of getting extinct due to drastic changes in the environment?"
The passage mentions: "...yet more than 90% of species that have ever lived on the earth are now extinct." This is a historical fact about species that have already lived and gone extinct in the past. It does not mean that 90% of the currently existing species (the ten million species mentioned) are presently in immediate danger of getting extinct. Therefore, Assumption 2 is invalid as it misinterprets a historical statistic as a future projection for current species.

3. Analysis of Assumption 3: "Darwin’s theory explains all the natural phenomenon."
The passage compares Darwinian laws to the laws of Copernicus, Galileo, Newton, and Einstein as "sets of natural laws that explain natural phenomena in the universe." However, it does not state that Darwin's theory explains all natural phenomena. Darwin's theory specifically explains biological evolution and extinction, while other scientists' laws explain physical or astronomical phenomena. Claiming it explains all natural phenomena is an overgeneralization and is therefore invalid.

Conclusion: Only the first assumption is validly derived from the text.