Evolution is not a religion of humanism

 I constantly hear statements by people who dont believe in evolution, that show a complete lack of understanding of the subject. If someone wants to not believe in evolution, that is fine, but I would urge them to at least try to get a basic understanding of it first before they reject it outright. First, evolution is descriptive, it is not prescriptive. It describes things, not prescribes how things should be. Some believe evolution is a "religion" of nonbelievers. That it is a "religion" of humanism.

 Some, though just a handful today, of God believers believe the earth is flat. Does teaching that the earth is round constitute the teaching of a religious view because it goes against the religious belief of some that the earth is flat? Now, very few people (including Christians) take that view but if 20% of Americans believed the earth was flat (about the same number of Americans who believe in a 6000 year old earth) would we have to teach the dual "theory" that the earth is flat along with it being round in geography classes? Or do we only teach alternatives dependent if a certain percentage of Americans hold those views?

If so, then science because a popularity contest, nothing more. We would not state, if a sizable number of Americans believed the atomic theory of matter went against their religion, that it should not be taught in physics classes. In fact, most people who believe in evolution believe in God. About 1/2 of Americans believe in evolution to a certain extent but only 1/10 of Americans are without a belief in God, so 80% of evolutionary believers in fact, are religious to some extent. Do these religious Americans believe that their belief in evolution is part of their religion or part of their knowledge of science?

The fact is, something should be taught in science classes when it has solid evidence behind it. Evolution meets and exceeds that test. There are not only fossils but transitional fossils such as homo habilis and homo erectus. There is the fact that fossils are only found in certain geological strata and not randomly in the geological layers. Creationism or the new buzzterm, Intelligent Design, rests on the idea that something can't be explained (because of its' complexity) without a deity.

 It leaves unanswered wouldn't a deity be more complex then the answers he supposedly solves and second why when the knowledge of science keeps expanding at such a great rate, we would expect that there is certain knowledge that cannot be answered without a deity? After all, we find the idea of Thor hurling lightning bolts laughable in our modern day. Lastly, a scientific theory is not a guess by the way, but a set of principles built on observations. Creationism or ID fails that test.