Plenty of cults exist - every cult has its 'religious dogma', its idols, its 'prophets', its 'science', its 'proof' and its intolerant liturgy of demands. Cults everywhere: Islam, the State, the cult of Gay and Queer, Marxism, Darwin and Evolution, 'Science', Globaloneywarming, Changing Climate, Abortion....a nice variety for the human-hater, amoral, anti-rationalist to choose from. It is so much fun mocking them isn't it ?
Tempus Fugit Memento Mori - Time Flies Remember Death
The non-science cult of Darwin and Evolution. The mouse became Mozart. The bacteria became Barry Obama. The flying lizard, the condor. The holy Trinity of Darwinian theology, the gods of time, random selection and mutations, made it all happen. Insane but the media and educational systems portray such magic as 'settled, consensus science'. In reality of course it is a gigantic state-funded fraud. Without the $20 billion + the US Federal Government spends on such nonsense and propaganda, the cult of Darwin would be viewed as scientifically valid as say, necromancy or palm-reading. The cult of evolution is a ward of the state.
Heinz' book is short, pithy and lists the most obvious problems with evolution. No science, none, not one single iota of proof, exists for evolution in any sphere, including biochemistry, the fossil record, and DNA-RNA. Other than that, evolution is 'scientific'.
Darwin himself gave up on natural selection itself a remarkably inane idea. Each species and individual within that species has a software code or DNA. That code does not change into other species code; nor does it allow the creature to 'naturally select' from code it does not have. You might wish to have wings, but your DNA does not 'select' wings and grant your wish.
With natural selection a nonsense the Neo-Darwinists turned to mutations. Anyone who has undergone radiation treatment knows that mutations harm and kill,they don't add value. The idea of mutations leading the protozoa to become Putin is so discredited that it is remarkable they still teach the children in biology texts that mutations will breed new species. State propaganda as lurid sci-fi.
“..evolution can’t start with a one-celled animal and make legs and eyes and brains. No combination of downhill or horizontal changes could ever transform the offspring of bacteria into anything but different bacteria.”
“..mutations producing new and more complex organs have not been observed.”
In fact bacteria found which are 'supposedly' 3.5 billion years old [one should be very skeptical of such dates], are the same as the bacteria today. That alone disproves this dumb theory. But surely say the Darwinists, the human embryo is really that of a salamander and makes it easier to kill [abort] does it not?
“...human baby is human from the moment of conception. The development of the embryo is directed by human DNA. There is no stage when the development of the embryo is determined by monkey DNA or fish DNA.” [anyone with a brain knows this, and ultrasound and fetus-scopes have proved it]
“DNA and RNA are so complex and hard to construct that scientists can’t even make them in the lab!” [other than that abiogenesis is science.....]
“..scientists should be able to make a cell in the lab. They can’t even make its RNA or DNA! They can’t even make the nucleotides RNA and DNA are made of!”
How about that goddess of time with the magic wand, couldn't she make the DNA and RNA ?
“Lipids, proteins, DNA, and RNA all break down over time. In addition, proteins, DNA, and RNA gradually switch over to become half right, and half left-handed. Therefore, huge periods of time would not build up large quantities of any of the substances cells are made of, even if they could form in nature.”
How about those wings ?
“...flight [is] an even greater problem to evolution though, [flight is] found in widely varying forms of life: • Insects • Birds • Dinosaurs • Bats. Evolutionists say no creatures with wings evolved from any other winged creature, but each evolved from a completely different ancestor with no wings. If it did, why is there no evidence of this in fossils?” [don't confuse evolution with facts....]
The cult of Evolution says that leaping lizards magically changed scales into feathers, and then of course, even more miraculously, the goddess of mutations and the god of 'random chance', completely transformed the bone structure, the organs, the brain, the eyes, and the respiratory system of the lizard – all at the same time – to allow it to fly. Evolution has nothing to say about the genesis of the fly, or the millions of flying insects we find around us. Apparently dinosaurs ran up hills, and turned their scales into feathers to become the 'bigger' bird forms [hence the Darwin cult's fraud of putting feathers onto dinosaurs, though none existed]. Just for fun these evolutionary gods also added radar and the ability to use the earth's magnetic field as a flight-guide to the flying reptiles. So generous are the gods of Darwinism. So loving.
Fossils you say?
“..fossil record does not offer evidence for either slow or rapid evolution. Fossils show distinct groups that start fully formed and stay that way until they become extinct.”
“...trilobites, very early in the history of life on Earth, hit upon the best possible lens design that optical physics has ever been able to formulate. (as quoted in Ellis, Richard (2001), Aquagenesis (New York: Viking)”
The Darwinists can't explain the explosion of phyla  540 million years ago, named the Cambrian explosion, in which complex life forms suddenly appeared. Their only lame response is that the fossil record is still incomplete. Over 200 million fossils have been uncovered and there is not a single transitional species which has been discovered. Not a one. I would say that 0 for 200 million makes the theory a mockery.
To overcome the fossil record the cult of Evolution, which is now desperate, screams that extinct species prove their theory! How stupid is this? Species go extinct because they lose function. Evolution posits the opposite. All species must over time, gain functionality. This is false and not sustained by observation or the fossil record. Further, in this vein, extinct species should be of no concern to us, since random chance and the mysterious 'survival of the fittest' [another tautology, the biggest ape clubs his competitors to death, survives and therefore is the 'fittest']; should generate ever more and newer specimens.
But we don't see this do we in the natural world? Extinct species are not replaced by new experiments. We don't see any fossils of transition at all. We don't see walking fish. We don't see 'random' experiments of 'missing links'. All we see are well-defined species and individuals. How can a random process create order ? How can a random process create code ? How can a random process produce thinking, communication and imagination ? Evolution is really, really stupid. It is not science, but a cult of faith. Absurd, immoral, degrading. No wonder Atheists such as Hitler and Stalin were so impressed by it.