What Darwinists don’t recognize is that, in the name of promoting science, they are actually promoting skepticism about what can be trusted in the name of science.
Bears evolved into whales? No, that’s been rejected. “Scientists” suggest that whales might have evolved from a cat-like animal, or a hyena-like animal, or (fill in the blank).
“It is thought by some that…”
This is “science”?
Evolution is a fact, if evolution is defined as the observation that some living systems are not now as they once were. According to this definition I count myself as an evolutionist.
But Darwinists are unwilling to acknowledge their ignorance concerning how this all came about, and persist in presenting unsupported speculation in the name of science.
This is ultimately destructive of the scientific enterprise. When people read such things as “science has discovered…” or “scientific consensus assures us that…” or some such, people are likely to assume that they are being conned, even if this is not the case, because they have been burned by so many claims in the past that turned out to be transparently false or eventually invalidated by evidence.
Based upon what I’ve learned over my 60 years of existence — mathematics, chemistry, physics, music and language study, computer programming, AI research, and involvement in multiple engineering disciplines — I find this Darwinism stuff to be a desperate attempt to deny the obvious: design and purpose in the universe and human existence.
The irony is that Darwinists are doing much harm to that which they presume to promote — confidence in claims made in the name of science.