Interesting that you claim 'Darwinism' is metaphysics on the basis of a quote about Lamarck (!?!) and that evolution is a "universal acid" from Daniel Dennett without mentioning that Dennett's book was 100% pro-evolution.
Wasn't that obvious, Dennett isn't just pro-evolution, he is hard core Darwinian. Typical mindless mockery, nothing more.
So...two quotes which look good, but aren't quite what they appear. This doesn't bode well for the rest of your post, which seemed to be very carefully written, I'll grant you that, but carefully written in a very angled way to give the impression that your references are supporting your point of view. As you admit to being a young earth creationist, one can't help thinking that quoting Dennett, Darwin and Popper smacks of doing a great deal of research to find angles that can be used in your favour rather than understanding what they are actually saying. Plus quote mining has the additional handicap of undermining any legitimate points you may make.
Nothing about evolution, nothing about Darwin, Popper or Dennett. Like all Darwinian zealots you just hurl insults like they have something substantive to them.
Incidentally, the above is simply another false, tedious attempt to claim that atheism/evolution/whatever is a conspiracy theory against your god. It's wrong and boring. It's like claiming that you know full well that Zeus exists etc etc but you are deliberately suppressing the truth. It's just silly.
No, my post identifies what the actual conflict is over. There are two definitions for evolution. The scientific one is the change of alleles in populations over time, the one you are using is the apriori assumption of universal common descent by exclusively naturalistic means.
You completely missed the part about Creationism as doctrine, the transcendence of Darwinian naturalistic assumptions went right over your head. Darwinian naturalistic assumptions are not just atheistic, they are venomously antagonistic toward an form of theism, unless it's essentially atheistic. What is more it comes before the empirical evidence and is assumed well before the evidence is examined:
It's clear, for example, that to the extent that Darwinian Evolution governs the development of life forms on this planet that is not an artifact of the Earth. Darwinian Evolution is a logic which is applicable to all life forms and all biosystems that may exist in the universe, even the ones we have not discovered (
Prof. Robert A. Weinberg, MIT Biology)
What you are calling evolution is nothing more then a naturalistic assumption that everything must have a naturalistic cause and nothing can ever have God as the cause. This isn't difficult to discern since it's 100% consistent among the evolutionists, falsely so called.
What is really sad is that you will never learn anything about the genuine article of science or the Christian doctrine of Creation from these snake pit debates. Mainly because people like you immediately lash out with fallacious ad hominems and provide nothing substantive, ever.
I actually feel sorry for you.
Have a nice day

Mark