[Dimensio]

That argument would have more weight if Darwinism was a theory based strictly on empirical evidence, and not a theory based primarily on materialist presuppositions and speculation.

Is this tied in with the common (and false) creationist belief that the theory of evolution was written not because of observations made by Darwin but because Darwin wanted to find some 'exuse' to explain life without a Creator?

[Aquinasfan]

Is this tied in with the common (and false) creationist belief that the theory of evolution was written not because of observations made by Darwin but because Darwin wanted to find some 'exuse' to explain life without a Creator?

The idea that blind material forces built up all life is speculation, and speculation based on the false philosophy of materialism. This may or may not have been Darwin's theory, or his intention, but it represents "evolution" as the term is commonly understood today.

Additionally, support for the theory seems to me to be generally based on an a priori conviction that the theory is true, rather than on a careful and open-minded evaluation of the evidence.