There have been posts letting on that evolutionism was adopted on the basis of the science, and that scientists became convinced due to the evidence. Nobody other than myself has thus far come up with even a single example of "conversion"; rather I have been challenged to produce more and more evidence. (As if those requesting it care about evidence. They protest against it whenever it's presented, so figure that out...)

In response to these challenges, and because it is convenient, I submit this PDF, which discusses the very issue of how Darwinism became the dominant religion/philosophy. Initial reviews of Darwin's book were surprisingly insightful:
Quote
It is thus by a vague hypothesis, entirely unsupported by facts, that our author meets a
difficulty which appears to us, as it has appeared to many others, to be of the gravest
magnitude.... [Darwin’s approach is] to found a theory, not on our knowledge, but on our
ignorance. Nor is this the only instance in which he seems to have adopted similar reasoning....
We confess ourselves to have been somewhat astonished at this bold manner of disposing of
difficulties....We had imagined, too, that the facts reasoned upon ought to be real, and not
hypothetical....We confess that the adoption of such conclusions, unsupported by any positive
and independent evidence, merely on the demand of an unproved theory, appears to us little
consistent with the sobriety and dignity of philosophical investigation.
and
Quote
We are asked to believe all these “maybes” happening on an enormous scale, in order that
we may believe the final Darwinian “maybe” as to the origin of species. The general form of his
argument is as follows:—all these things may have been, therefore my theory is possible, and
since my theory is a possible one, all those hypotheses which it requires are rendered probable.
There is little direct evidence that any of these maybes actually have been. Many of these
assumed possibilities are actually impossibilities,…
This is all quite true. If one wants for amusement and has time to kill, it's funny to find for "imagin" in any of Darwin's books. This will hit on both "imagine" and "imagination", and he can't go half a page without asking the reader to conjure a mental image of some fantasy or another.

Of course, even after the virtual monopoly became established, there has always been dissent. An ICR article entitled More on Anti-Darwinian Scientists Exerpted from the New Book by Wendell R. Bird, J.D., Attorney reveals a little about the more recent situation.
Quote
An anti-evolutionist approach is taken by many non-creationist scientists. Olson reports that there are "some among the biologists who feel that much of the [macroevolutionary] theory accepted by the majority today is actually false.
One must expect the courage of such men to be tested, as the members of the evolutionist power structure grow ever more fearful.

Dark Matter + Dark Energy = Dark Truth

"We find that such evidence demonstrates that the ID argument is dependent upon setting a scientifically unreasonable burden of proof for the theory of evolution." - Judge Jones Kitzmiller case
http://www.talkreason.org/articles/Falsify.cfm

"To Compel A Man To Furnish Funds For The Propagation Of Ideas He Disbelieves And Abhors Is Sinful And Tyrannical." - Thomas Jefferson

"And can the liberties of a nation be thought secure when we have removed their only firm basis, a conviction in the minds of the people that these liberties are the gift of God? That they are not to be violated but with his wrath?" - Thomas Jefferson