Freud's explanation in 1920 was that "humanity has in the course of time had to endure from the hands of science two great outrages upon its naive self-love. The first was when it realised that our earth was not the centre of the universe ... The second was when biological research robbed man of his peculiar privilege of having been specially created and relegated him to a descent from the animal world".
One wonders how long it took for Copernicus to be treated with respect; one scholar of Darwin suggested it could be another couple of centuries before we can forgive the man.

very interesting quotation of Freud; i do agree that both scholars represent 2 major revolutions in the very definition of what is a human.

I would argue that Darwin has not been hijacked by atheists. His theory is defended by people of reason against attack from religious fundamentalists. Not all these people are atheists, but when creationism is put forward as an "alternative" the stupidity of this religious position is just crying out to be ridiculed - by atheists and others.

Hey hi guys I agree with John not much else to add good people.

Forgot to take opportunity to look forward to your great clips & travel well into 09.Should be some more interesting arguments from the christian right,cheers.

When secularists defend "Darwinism", they are buying into the religionists' arguments. As Sen. Daniel Patrick Maynihan said, "When you start using the opposition's terminology, you've lost the argument". Evolution is not "Darwinism" any more than gravity is "Newtonism", relativity is "Einsteinism" or quantum theory is "Heisenberg-Planckism". By letting Darwin become inextricably attached to his theory rather than his body of work (his books), evolution is set up as an "-ism" to compete with all the religious "-isms" in the world.