Dark matter a dying theory?

When the galaxy rotations did not fit the evolutionary model, instead of questioning the evolutionary model (dogma must not be challenged), "Dark Matter" was invented to explain away the problem.Conveniently, Dark Matter, by definition, is unobservable, except for the effects it supposedly creates.The first time I read about Dark Matter I recognized it as obviously circular reasoning, except that it is not so obvious to the evolutionists who wanted to believe in something they could not see.So now, some posters to this thread are not even sure DM is matter after all, but they are absolutely certain it exists, whatever it is (sounds like "faith" to me).

***Trying to "bring down" a scientific pursuit to being on the same level as faith, is only insulting faith, itself. The whole "see, you guys are using faith too" argument makes faith look bad. As a christian I ask you to stop that.***Not at all. I do not denegrate faith in God one bit. However, you must admit that the faith/science label is certainly relevent in this forum and in the public debate in public schools. Here, and in our culture in general, science is assumed to be objective while faith is subjective, and not to be taught in schools. I claim that much of what passes for "objective science" is really a faith in naturalism. That is not denegration, that is simply categorization.***There is no "evolutionary model" that acts as dogma to cosmologists who theorize about dark matter. Why do you think there is?The fact that dark matter was invented is a challange to the previous theory that didn't include it, so what we're seeing is revision as opposed to clutching onto dogma.***Actually, the ancient age of the universe is the dogma being clutched to. There is little differential speed observed in the arms of spiral galaxies, a fact that would be impossible if the universe was 20-30 billions of years old. The "answer" is that there must be a "sphere" of matter around the plane of the visible arms to account for the observed rotation. This matter must be "dark matter" to explain why we cannot see it. (Of course, there is no explaination why all the bright matter settled in one plane.)***Enormous amounts of matter are having to be held together through gravitational frorces from something... It turns out that we cannot directly see it.***What is your basis for saying this? What exists in the observed universe that requires dark matter? The only "evidence" is the speed of rotation in spiral galaxies, and that requires the assumption of an old universe.If you can entertain for one second the possibility of a young universe, then the rotational speed of spiral arms offers no puzzle at all, and is even consistent with the hypothesis.