What will be that main way of religion in 100 years?

[Rokcet Scientist]

Dream on! The enlightenment started 400 years ago, and atheists are still a small minority!
Perhaps in a 1,000 years. Never in a 100.

Atheism didn't have the amount of influence, not even close. Science, technology or evidence is fairly recent to aid the corner of Atheism, that's why it took that long.

BS! It is empirical science (scientific insight) that started atheism/humanism. 400/500 years ago. With Erasmus, Galileï, Kepler, Copernicus, Huygens, Newton, c.s. It wasn't 'fairly recent' at all!
Atheism has had half a millennium already to germinate and grow! It hasn't gotten far yet.

It wont take nearly as long to spread from this point forward.

You don't know that, so that is pure wishful thinking, a.k.a. projection, a.k.a. auto-suggestion, a.k.a. self-hypnosis...
If the past half millennium is any indication atheism isn't going anywhere soon!

A lot of people will be moved out of their fringe faith, and there's a lot of fringe-believers out there.

Projection.

And of course a believer of supernatural crap is going to say Atheism is going to take a long time

If you think I am "a believer of supernatural crap" you need to brush up on your comprehensive reading skills.

you're as scared of it as Bill O'Reilly is when he says Atheism is dying. HAHAHA not even close.

Double projection.
You seem to mix up all this stuff into a very messy fantasy.

And it's not a small minority, you've been fed false polls that ask misleading questions about religion. You could probably get the average number of Atheists in America alone to about 15% and in Europe its over 50%.

References please? Links? Please illustrate your claims. Without it it's just more unfounded projection, wishful thinking.

Youre the one dreaming if you think Religion has a place in the new world Science and reason are putting together...without religion's help, but also its hinderance on that Science.

Huh?
Can you rephrase that gibberish please?

But why would you even want to 'dominate' in the first place? That's an imperialistic, even a fascist attitude! Why would you want to be more or better than other people (except in sports or arts)? You even use a religious verb to describe that situation: to 'dominate' = to be the Lord...

So if you consider yourself an atheist you will need to rethink this whole 'domination' thing, Slappy!

Do you wonder why I have as many Reputation points as you with about 5/6 less posts?

No. I couldn't care less about 'reputation points'.
But they are very important to you, apparently.

Condescension is fun huh?...

That's very relative: if the condescended is too thick to get it the condescender is just jerking himself off.