Those Iranian authors who have commented on the verification or falsification of the theory of evolution have approached it in very general way. Two types of explications can make future comments more accurate: first, noticing the fact that this theory consists of several sub-theories: It seems that ‘evolution-as-such’, ‘natural selection’, ‘common ancestor’, and ‘gradualism’ are largely confused in the writings of some Iranian writers. Most Iranian thinkers (Isfahani, Allameh Tabatabai, Allameh Jafari, Motahhari, Yadollah Sahabi, Makarem Shirazi, Mesbah Yazdi, Sobhani, Meshkini, and Abdolkarim Soroush) point to the issue of natural selection and common ancestor and believe that the reason for refutation or falsification of this theory is based on these two sub-theories. When considering the verification or falsification of a theory, it is necessary to pay attention to the analyses that have been made in the philosophy of science over the last century about the refutation and proof of a scientific theory. The present paper shows that the majority of Iranian writers' comments are based on these two sub-theories, though there are some exceptions. The authors' findings in this paper are twofold: first, the theory of natural selection as a principle is mathematically provable and therefore not subject to falsification. Second, other parts of the theory of evolution are falsifiable and unprovable, but subject to modification. That is why, many parts of the theory have been refuted or modified since Darwin.