You've noted yourself that science is amoral. And yet, you continue to pursue a values assessment as to why scientists would "collaborate," as to why Nazis erred in their determination of just which people to elevate or destroy, based upon the science of eugenics, which was drawn directly from Darwin. You apparently are mounting this as a defense of amoral science, because of the immorality of Nazi actions, choosing instead to focus blame upon the religion that provided you with your definition of morality. Odd.
Lying isn't nice. You will burn in hell for it.
Is it your premise that genocide, ethnic cleansing, and perhaps even specific attempts to eradicate Jews, all post-date Darwin and are the product of ideas that "have a straight line to" or are "drawn directly from" Darwin?