[gondramB]

I’m coming in late here....

but calling developmental biology “Darwinism” seems a lot like calling electromagnetic science “Franklinism”

and criticizing modern evolutionary synthesis for something that Darwin didn’t know or got wrong is a lot like blaming the semiconductor industry for something Benjamin Franklin didn’t know.

Which is to say that even the most clever attack in these avenues is almost always founded on either ignorence or deceit.

[count-your-change]

Your analogy fails. Darwin's theory of natural selection is the basis of biological evolutionary thinking today. The mechanisms and examples may be debated by evolutionists but natural selection is still the underpinning of Darwin's theory of evolution and of biological evolutionary theory today.

Darwinism fits quite well as he may rightly be called the father of modern evolution.
It would be difficult to speak of the Franklin stove without reference to Franklin. There have been endless modifications to his basic design but they still contain the basic elements of the original to the point they can accurately be called “Franklin” stoves, not developmental heating devices or some such.

Darwinism for Darwin's “children”.