Yes and no.
The idea that God wants us to be our best selves, to learn and grow, to repent our sin and to become better is a Biblical idea. On the macro level we even see this happening, the world during the early Bible being extremely warlike, and the people of God gradually becoming more and more peaceful, with only those not of God (the Romans, the Babylonians, etc) being warlike and authoritarian. On a genetic level, it is not "dangerous" to believe that God might not also have a plan for us genetically (which is why I strongly oppose things like machine/human hybrids, cloning and genetic modification, we as humans must grow as a species and evolve as God intends us to be).
What is a dangerous idea is Darwin's take on evolution. There are actually many
evolution theories, but most of the ignorant people out there won't bother with any of them. There is Lamarck's theory of acquired characteristics (which has since borne out in epigenetics). There is the theory that creatures mainly evolve due to environmental crises (which seems to be proven not just by studies of islands that past volcanic eruptions had two different flora and so birds developed two distinct beaks, but Darwin's own journey). Ironically, Darwin's trip supported both of these theories on some level, but what they never actually proved was his assertion of "survival of the fittest."
1. First, as a result of the US (and other countries) selecting the healthiest, the strongest, etc to be in the military, the scrawniest tended to be the ones left. This is sometimes called the small fish theory, as in, it's not the apparent fittest that survived but those that were scrawny and able to get away. This is biblical too. We see in the Passover how the Jews were not the leading power in Egypt, not particularly smart or strong, yet they survived a plague event that killed the firstborn.
2. This theory itself is dangerous because it breeds psychopathic competition for certain people (who decide themselves to be "fittest") to basically try to fight or kill others. Ethnic cleansing is one of these manifestations, but a general ideal that there are essential and nonessential people (sound familiar? It should, this is COVID rhetoric) and that certain people shouldn't be allowed to live or work because they have stupid or backwards ideas compared to us enlightened.
3. It is dangerous because the Bible teaches that all of us have intrinsic worth. All of us are created equal, not "some are more equal than others."
4. And it is dangerous because it undermines the idea that humanity as a group is responsible for its survival. If there is a natural disaster, and we all fixate on safety of ourselves rather than making sure the group survives, useful skills that could help everyone survive are lost. For example, an avalanche. The strongest runner may be the fittest, but if they don't bother saving a farmer, a medic, and a few other of these less fit people, he's gonna starve alone.
5. Lastly, when we start trying to determine the fittest, we get into evolutionary dead-ends. So strong that they can't move a muscle? Not useful. So smart that they basically overthink and never carry on reproduction? Not useful. Suppose someone wanted the perfect supersoldiers, lacking in remorse. They'd basically start removing population once whatever war that bred them was over.