Though at first it may seem that darwinism and humanism are not two things that go together well, I would argue to the contrary.  In general I find science to be a very humanistic pursuit. The whole point of science is to make life easier for people, Even if scientists aren’t always aware of what good they are doing.
Richard Dawkins, an author famous for his book “the selfish gene”, expresses his idea that “our lives are ruled by all sorts of warmer human ambitions” as a response to people saying that his scientific, darwinistic work sucks the meaning out of life.  I tend to agree with him, especially if life happens to ultimately be meaningless, it is even more important to value being a human and the relationships that we are able to form. 
Though Darwin’s and Dawkins’s works both can be misinterpreted as being humanistic, they simply try answer questions of why we act as we do.  They try to understand human behaviour on a genetic level.  In some ways, if you look at our success as a species, in combination with the two authors’ ideas, one might say that they would put humanity on a pedestal of sort.  Dawkins, in particular, says that humans are evolved to the point that we can resist the actions our selfish genes would otherwise have us perform.  He cites the use of birth control as evidence. 
Selfish genes and natural selection and these kind of scientific theories do not determine how we act, what they do is try to explain some of our actions that seem otherwise inexplicable.  Perhaps selfish genes are what dictate our instincts?