Can Atheism become corrupt like religion?

[Iroscato]

Well, welcome to the forum, I suppose. An intro thread wouldn't have gone amiss, but I will attempt to address your points nonetheless, unhinged though they may be.

According to Darwin's theory, it should have taken humans millions of years to evolve to the intelligent species that we are today.

You are correct. Billions, in fact. Roughly 3.5 billion years. So far, so good.

Yes we did come from Ape man eons ago

Not exactly. Apes and humans share a common ancestor, which was neither ape nor human. I believe the final divergence occurred around 5 million years ago. But still, you show at least a rudimentary understanding of the process.

but there is a missing link between 50,000yrs when we went from Neanderthal and primitive man to 'magically' gaining 'self conscientiousness" in just less than 100,000yrs - when other animals on earth have taken eons to get to where they are at like the dolphin.

Ok, you're losing me now. Yes, there are a lot of missing links, archeaologists are the first to admit that. Mostly due to stuff like soil displacement, tectonic activity, erosion, etc. We've painted a fairly solid picture with what we do have so far, and the picture is slowly improving. There was nothing 'magical' about the process. Neanderthal could use tools, make clothes, exist in communities. Their DNA differentiates from ours by just 0.12%. I think it's safe to assume they were self-aware. Self-awareness is just intelligence that is finally great enough to recognise itself. There is nothing magical about it. Earlier species of proto-human may well have also had some level of self-awareness, we just haven't been able to get good enough fossils on record for it yet.

Evolution does not have any set goals in mind - it is a process that occurs when random genetic mutations are tested against environmental factors. Whatever survives, passes on its genetic material to the next generation. That is it. Dolphins are dolphins...simply because that is the path their evolution took. It can be slow and stable, in species like the coelocanth, unchanged for hundreds of millions of years, or it can happen relatively quickly in the space of a few million or even a few hundred thousand years - we are one example. Also, there is a slowly building mound of evidence that dolphins also have a form of sentience, as well as certain species of ape.

Most atheists hate talking about 'how did the Sumerians gain all their knowledge" 6,000yrs ago shortly after the ice-age when they were hunter gatherers.

I'm an atheist, and I find the subject utterly fascinating, rather than hating it as you claim. I have also never come across anyone who shows less than mild interest in the subject, either. I really don't know where you're getting your assertions from, but they are starting to form a pattern.
So, the sumerians. I can only generally theorise, as it's far from being a subject that I have any particular expertise in, but I would think that after the Ice Age, this particular civilisation would have a close bond within the communities from the constant hardships experienced by their ancestors. 'Work together or die' springs to mind. This would allow people to work harder together and get along better, leading to all sorts of cultural and technological innovations in a very short space of time. Essentially, the aftermath of the close bonds and nurturing nature forged during the Ice Age gave the people of proto-western civilisation a massive amount of momentum to work with.
Once you have things like fire, rudimentary building, tools, clothes, basic language, proto-religious ideas, the stage is set for a rapid and exponential expansion of technological mastery.

Here's my issue: and why I think 21st century Atheism is no different than 14th century Catholicism dictatorship. In the 14th century if you said the earth might not be the centre of the universe "you'd be hanged on the stake". In the 21st century if you say the universe might of been created by intelligent design 'you're career is over and you'd be labelled as a quack".

Your statement is massively flawed. How on earth can you compare atheism to the brutal and dictatorial nightmare of catholicism? It is not a religion, it is a lack of religion. A void where is normally found, filled by other more important stuff. There are no atheist churches, crusades, inquisitions, witch hunts, traditions, messiahs, deities, holidays, or anything that makes it resemble a religion.

In the 21st century if you say the universe might of been created by intelligent design 'you're career is over and you'd be labelled as a quack"

Personally, I find that less serious than being burned at the stake, somehow. But besides that, where are your examples of such occurrences happening? There are a fair number of theist scientists. Not many, as most realise it's bollocks, but a few.

Today, as a scientist. If you so dare go against the 'status quo' of Atheism you lose your job.

If you go against the status quo and are proven right, you are lauded, awarded, and are suddenly hugely attractive to the opposite sex. Again, from where are you drawing your assertions?

So what's the flaw? Atheism is slowly but surely becoming a cult-following, within a hundred years a hierarchy council will be formed similar to the catholic/jewdaism/islam councils. And future scientists trying to disprove the 'status quo' that evolution created humanity will be burnt to the stake and witch hunted (figuratively speaking). Why will they be witch hunted? You're average atheists could care less if someone is researching 'intelligent design', but the hierarchy of the new Atheism in elitists in power will feel threatened.

Absolute rambling nonsense. There is no sign that atheism will become a cult at large. There are a few fringe nutters, but we tend to ignore those. We have already proven beyond reasonable doubt that humankind evolved. This is backed up by decades upon decades of intensive work, research, fact-finding, back-breaking digs, countless fossils being uncovered and carefully examined down to the atom, the combined sweat and blood and tears of millions of scientists across the world for over a century, using the absolute latest and most cutting-edge technology available to them at their respective times of investigation. And what does the other camp have?

A book.

There so far has been absolutely no empirical evidence that humanity did not evolve. If some did turn up, it would be incorporated into scientific theory, after intense scrutiny and research.