If you believe that Darwin is wrong then does it follow that you are a religious fundamentalist?

Well, does your logical proof then hold up to Flat earth vs Spherical Earth arguments? How about gravity or aeronautics? An idea being widely accepted does not put it in to doubt.

It is only as a matter of supporting their faith that ANYONE forwards Creationism.

Don't be ridiculous. I can provide you with plenty of examples of Christians, very faithful people, who nevertheless accept evolution as scientific fact. It's a shame that you let your religion get in the way of being a thinking human being. Not everybody does.

Evolution *has* stood up to unbiased scrutiny for a long time now. The only people who have any doubts are the biased scrutinizers, like yourself.

Edit: Okay, fine. No, it does not necessarily follow that if you argue evolution is not valid that you must be a religious fundamentalist. That said, there are very, very, very few people arguing against evolution that are doing so for any reasons other than religion.

Darwin's Theory of Evolution IS a religious belief. A believer in "evolution" (as an explanation for the creation and variety of life) is a religious fundamentalist.

On an objective, scientific level, the Theory of Evolution is not any more sound, or supported by scientific evidence, as any alternative theory.

There are people who criticise Darwin from a scientific viewpoints. Many scientists think evolution occured in sudden leaps, not gradually. But no serious scientist doubts evolution for the same reason that no serious scientists thinks the Sun revolves around the earth.

No, atheism and evolutionism do not go hand in hand. There is no proof of either. I am not a fundamentalist and I believe in creationism rather than evolution.

Here's a website of atheists who believe that evolution (or at least abiogenesis) is wrong.

You should base your assertion that Darwin is wrong based on scientific facts and not on religious beliefs.

no, i once read the blog of an atheist who presented all kinds of proofs against evolution. it was pretty strange.

i'm no longer incredibly valuable what you recommend via "How would desire to we act?" How we would desire to continuously act has no longer something to do with our dating with our primate kinfolk. How we would desire to continuously act, from journey, is as a rule geared for what's applicable for the collective team (to an quantity). undergo in recommendations, as humanity progressed it became obvious that our survival opportunities more advantageous dramatically if we acted in a cooperative trend. as a result, our habit could have progressed alongside with us wherein strikes that aided team survival have been inspired, while strikes that endangered the gang diminished. Take homicide, as an occasion. of course, a homicide hurts the gang; that is one much less guy or woman which could help in accumulating food, looking after youthful, chasing off predators, etc. in addition to, considering people are self-conscious, that is painfully person-friendly to think of that early people went "i does no longer decide to die, and you do no longer decide to die, and all of us do no longer decide to die, so permit's make it a no-no for one individual to kill somebody else". that is an instinctual stress that then manifested itself right into a communicated contract or regulation. robbery is comparable. valuable, there is something to be mentioned for finding out to purchase as massive a bite of the pie as attainable; to accomplish that potential greater suitable opportunities to your particular genes to be carried on. To take this to the extreme, although, you finally end up with some team members starving by way of loss of components collectively as others flourish (that ought to harm the gang typical), or you have a team that does no longer something yet purely take what they choose from one yet another... of course undesirable for community unity. So this habit could even have been chosen against. etc etc. even nonetheless our society has gotten sufficiently massive the place the strikes of one individual are no longer likely to destabilize civilization, those ingrained behaviors are nonetheless with us. that is why, i think of, we see maximum of of the comparable regulations doping up in all forms of societies and religions in the process background. all of us 'understand the regulations', that is purely that diverse communities wrote them down in incredibly diverse manners.

Darwin was the Devil incarnate.