If there really were no conflict Darwinists would not be struggling so hard to to THE authority on all things that make a human, origin, psychology, morality, even the the tendency of humans to worship.
Darwinists are no more immune to this tendency to worship something, someone than anyone else and so it's not surprising that Darwinism has been elevated to a religious dogma.
That is why there is conflict and it won't be defined away anymore than the conflicts between other religious can be defined away.
Atheistic religion? Yes, since anything that functions as a religion and is treated as such is religion. It's not in the eye of the beholder but in the eye of the practitioner.
>>To say no one person speaks for science is to say no scientist could be quoted since and it has nothing to do with what a prominent scientist has said about his own motivations and unspoken views.<<
You certainly can quote anyone you wish. It just doesn’t have much heft.
>>If there really were no conflict Darwinists would not be struggling so hard to to THE authority on all things that make a human, origin, psychology, morality, even the the tendency of humans to worship. Darwinists are no more immune to this tendency to worship something, someone than anyone else and so it’s not surprising that Darwinism has been elevated to a religious dogma.<<
There is no struggle, per se. It is just that Creationists have decided that they want to attack this particular branch of science, despite the fact it is supported by hundreds of scientific disciplines, millions of scientists and billions of artifacts.
Science, when used properly, tells an objective story. The AGW crowd is abusing science. But there was no money to be made from “The Origin of the Species” and the small number of fakers were exposed by the Scientific Method. Religion has no such mechanisms.
>>That is why there is conflict and it won’t be defined away anymore than the conflicts between other religious can be defined away.<<
Facts cannot be wished away.
>>Atheistic religion? Yes, since anything that functions as a religion and is treated as such is religion. It’s not in the eye of the beholder but in the eye of the practitioner.<<
Religion is based in belief. Science is based on facts and logic. As I said, science cannot be swayed by belief in any circumstance. But theories are used as a tool of science to explain phenomenon. Billions of data points studied by millions of scientists over 200 years. The data are overwhelming.