Darwinism and popular culture: So you acknowledge that Darwinism is in fact a cult?

Now, here's an evolutionist I can sort of get. Unlike most, he despises the popular "Darwin" cult, and wants to get to the heart of things:

By propounding “Darwinism,” even scientists and science writers perpetuate an impression that evolution is about one man, one book, one “theory.” The ninth-century Buddhist master Lin Chi said, “If you meet the Buddha on the road, kill him.” The point is that making a master teacher into a sacred fetish misses the essence of his teaching. So let us now kill Darwin.

That all life is related by common ancestry, and that populations change form over time, are the broad strokes and fine brushwork of evolution. But Darwin was late to the party. His grandfather, and others, believed new species evolved. Farmers and fanciers continually created new plant and animal varieties by selecting who survived to breed, thus handing Charles Darwin an idea. All Darwin perceived was that selection must work in nature, too.

Of course, that does not mean that selection can create masses of information, as Darwin hoped - and as Carl Safina's New York Times essay linked above (February 9, 2009) delicately avoids.

But fine. When deprogramming people, we are getting somewhere when we have got them to acknowledge that Darwinism is in fact a cult.

Find out why there is an intelligent design controversy: