This is a book about philosophy. In the real world, there is nothing that can be called objective science. Data, 'evidence', reality, experimentation, hypotheses are all interpreted through your world view. Someone looking at soft tissue from Dinosaurs who is drenched in the theology of Darwin, will wonder how red blood cells could have survived 65 million years and begin to construct 'evidence' to support his pre-determined conclusion. Darwinism, as Wiker makes clear, is a project of faith and philosophy. It is an entire framework of how to view the world and everything in it. In this vein it is not science but a religious imperative, full of canons, liturgy, rites and rituals.

As Wiker proves, Darwin [who stole, borrowed, or poached almost all of his ideas from others] did not invent anything new. By his day evolution was 2000 years old. Epicurus in the 4^th century BC and Lucretius in the 1rst had long anticipated Darwin. Their faith is remarkably similar to that of the 19^th century secular theology. Indeed Wiker pulls out long passages of Lucretius which discuss mutations, selection and metamorphosis of species -which we know today is impossible. No evidence whatsoever exists that single cells through some magical process of selection or mutations [which kill genomic software], can add software code and become multi-cellular. None. What is the point of Epicurean-Darwinian materialism?

Wiker: “...essence of Epicurean theology was the subordination of the gods to nature so that they could not interfere with human affairs.”

Epicurean theology is based on natural relativity and random chance materialism. The purpose of life according to Epicurus and his devoted cult followers, was to avoid any disturbances. Gods, philosophies, ideals which disturbed your 'happiness' were to be avoided. This 'utilitarianism' did not necessarily mean hedonism. In fact as Wiker explains, Epicurus was monkish in habit and belief. He was no sexual or substance addicted profligate, but quite the opposite. However, his theory that no immaterial causations or interference exist, and that all of life was simply based on indestructible atoms [Democritus], would inevitably lead to hedonism. In other words, nature has no limits, no morality, no judgements. You are atoms, therefore you exist. Being free from disturbance, theological or immaterial, is the real purpose of your material existence.

Wiker: “Epicurus himself said, "ever- pleasure is a good thing." Since only the individual can affirm or deny whether something gives him a pleasing sensation, then no other individual can deny the "goodness" of what someone else finds pleasant.”

Epicurus was thus a moral relativist as well as a materialist and atomist. He was a philosopher, not a 'scientist'. He had no means of knowing if atoms even existed, and if they did, if they were indestructible, or have [as we now know they do], constituent parts [thereby demolishing his theory]. In his world view, nature was boundless, the universe had no beginning, humans were just collections of bouncing, randomly arranged atoms [which can never explain the complexity of 100 trillion cells and organs such as the brain]; and that humans were little different than simians.

Wiker: “Epicurean Adam is indistinguishable from an animal, stripped by Lucretius of anything that would make him distinctly human. He has no speech, no tools, no thought about the past or future, no arts, no music, no fear of death and no religion....if human beings (along with all other creatures) are an accident of blind physical forces, then human society and morality must likewise be explained in terms of their accidental rise and development.”

For Epicurus and his disciple Lucretius, evolution meant that morality did not and could not exist. It was just a human construct, and one used to control and shape human affairs [presaging Rousseau and Darwin]. If morality did 'evolve', it was a random process, one born of selection if not convenience. The main point for the Lucretian-Epicureans was to rid mankind of religion. If morality was an evolved artifact and if nature was 'god', what need then was there of man made and irrelevant religious observance?

Wiker: “....if human beings (along with all other creatures) are an accident of blind physical forces, then human society and morality must likewise be explained in terms of their accidental rise and development.

But Lucretian – Epicurean theology is itself, ironically, just a world view and philosophy based on faith. There is no scientific evidence which supports evolution, contrary to the endless state-funded and media induced propaganda to the contrary. In fact real science destroys evolution's claim that random chance and some pixie-dust process of 'selection' would take E coli and create Epicurus.

Wiker: “Lucretius had no more evidence of the mechanism of evolution at work through the ages than he did of the existence of the eternal atom. The basis of his confidence in these things was (following Epicurus) the desire to rid the universe of divine influence, as is clear from his extended attack on religion at the beginning of Book Five, where his evolutionary account occurs.”

Darwinism is thus long pre-dated by ancient sources. There is precious little that is new in Darwin's work, we can read the same in the annals of ancient Greek and Roman philosophes. A derivative of this cult belief is of course materialism, moral relativism, and the atrocities associated with Atheist Evolutionist butchers such as Hitler, Stalin and Mao. Abortion, infanticide, euthanasia or killing the unneeded all flow from such a belief system. Modern atheists might want to reconsider their cult allegiance in the face of such facts.