I wonder if you believe in the ‘science’ of anthropogenic global warming as well?
You're comparing apples and oranges.
The process of evolution--not the theory, which was devised to explain the process, but the process itself--is an unavoidable feature of biology which scientists both account for and exploit to advance knowledge within the life sciences. It's apolitical, and, for the most part, people seem to appreciate the advances we've made using it. Furthermore, not all people of faith see a threat to their faith because evolution plays such a major role in biology. I certainly don't. Those who do, however, threaten scientific advancement if they should ever get into a position where they have the political power to stop or impede any research that is related to evolution.
On the other hand, the hypothesis that the fluorescence of CO2 within the infrared portion of the light spectrum has a disproportionate effect on the natural warming/cooling cycles of the earth has never, to my knowledge, been demonstrated. But, for politicians who've never succeeded in achieving authoritarian control (aka socialism) over the people, this hypothesis is a gift from heaven. They're not trying to restrict our freedom because they're control freaks--no, they're doing it to save the earth! Keep in mind that politicians decide which research gets funded--so any researcher who wants funding throws in something about "anthropogenic global warming" even if their research has nothing to do with climate change. It's a completely different issue.
You couldn't be more wrong. I read your comment above and the similarities leap off the page. Scientists who want funding have to toe the proper line. Oppose global warming? No money for you. Oppose Evolution? No money for you.
Science has demonstrated micro-evolution -- genetic change cannot be argued against. This has led to scientific advances. Great. The concept that all life has a common ancestor? This is not proven. Just like global warming is not proven.
There are cultural and political reasons why Evolution is pushed by certain people beyond the field of science. The reasons have to do with domination of people, and the imposition of control over free men and women with a Political Elite as the only law that must be obeyed. A higher law gets in the way -- but Evolution says we don't need any higher law: Men can handle everything and anything. Evolution is about socialism just as much as global warming is.
Some of us see this. You do not. If you cannot step away from the belief in macro-evolution, fine -- let's say for a moment that it is all true. You should be willing to aknowledge that in terms of funding and in terms of "political usefulness" for the Socialists, both Evolution and Global Warming are equally useful. You might want to say one is true and one is false -- but the people pushing these concepts don't care about Truth: they care about expediency. The Theory of Evolution is very expedient if you want to impose a secular, materialist, socialist society on mankind.