The point was that religion has become a part of our brain. How this happened (evolution, perhaps by accident), was not the important bit.
It isn't evolution, at least not in any genetic sense, it's simply culture. People believe religion is an immutable fact of life and the only possible source of meaning and morality when their culture teaches them as much. But there are cultures where religion matters far less than it does in, say, the US, where people get along just fine.
Religion is a coping mechanism for some, although its trivial to ignore. Religion is more likely than not a con-artist trick, that has lived on for centuries.
You've described people who uncritically accept authority, moralize disagreement, and engage in in-group/out-group behavior. None of those characteristics is unique to religion. You can find them in politics, sports fandom, nationalism, and virtually any ideological community.
Treating scientific consensus as authoritative isn't the same as treating it as sacred or infallible. Scientific consensus is provisional, evidence-based, and subject to revision. Someone can misunderstand that process or defer to it uncritically without turning science into a religion.
You're conflating dogmatism with religiosity. They're not synonyms. Calling something a religion because some adherents behave dogmatically strips the word "religion" of any meaningful distinction.