Atheism is a religion

[Undeceived]

Is atheism is a religion? Well, one has to analyze evolution to find out. Definition of science: what you can observe, test or demonstrate. Can you observe, test or demonstrate all six types of evolution?

Cosmic: the origin of time, space and matter. No
Chemical: all elements from H and He. No
Stellar: witnessed a star form. No
Organic: life from non-life. No
Macroevolution: one species becoming another. No. No transitional fossils or documentation of speciation involving increasing complexity.
Microevolution: Yes, but this is variation, not evolution. Genes don't gain any new info-- some just die off.

In short, evolution is a belief system, not science. You're welcome to believe any of these, or claim "we just haven't discovered it yet" but don't call it science. If it's not science, it's religion. This is cut and dry.

[frankiej]

Is atheism is a religion? Well, one has to analyze evolution to find out.

Are you stupid??? You just jumped from Atheism to evolution like a fuckin' madman... The two aren't necessarily connected. I have a friend who is an atheist who does not think evolution is a fact or remotely true.

[Whateverist]

Is atheism is a religion? Well, one has to analyze evolution to find out. Definition of science: what you can observe, test or demonstrate. Can you observe, test or demonstrate all six types of evolution?

Cosmic: the origin of time, space and matter. No
Chemical: all elements from H and He. No
Stellar: witnessed a star form. No
Organic: life from non-life. No
Macroevolution: one species becoming another. No. No transitional fossils or documentation of speciation involving increasing complexity.
Microevolution: Yes, but this is variation, not evolution. Genes don't gain any new info-- some just die off.

In short, evolution is a belief system, not science. You're welcome to believe any of these, or claim "we just haven't discovered it yet" but don't call it science. If it's not science, it's religion. This is cut and dry.

That's just silly. Scientists don't believe any of these things fervently, they merely represent their best guess to date .. the one the data best fits. Rest assured they will try their best to shoot down these theories through observation and experiment. What they think will either change or they will develop ever more reason to have confidence in those theories.

Theories are operating hypotheses subject to change over time. The beliefs you hold as a Christian are nothing like this. Your beliefs and what you wrongly claim is the "belief system of science" are nothing alike. Methodologically you approach belief in completely different ways.

You begin with the truth handed to you in a sacred book. You then look to make it fit the best you can to what is observed. You don't look for nor will you consider evidence to the contrary. You are not open to the truth, you merely hope fervently that you already have it. Good luck with that.

[Undeceived]

"You begin with the truth handed to you in a sacred book. You then look to make it fit the best you can to what is observed."
I'll throw that back at you. You look around and assume the answer for the origin of life is in what you see. You trust that scientists have no ulterior motive for promoting evolution. Even though evolution has no conclusive evidence, you accept it because there is no alternative. Having not been observed, tested or demonstrated groups it in the category of *weakest* theories, because many unproved theories have actually to an extent been observed, tested or demonstrated. An analogy would be a child looking at a pile of blocks. The child tries make sense of where the blocks came from only by looking at the blocks. The blocks must have made themselves, right? It never occurs to them that the parent put them there.

[frankiej]

Jesus thunder-humping Christ, are you serious?

Go do some homework... You have caught this prick on a bad day, my friend.

[Undeceived]

Is atheism is a religion? Well, one has to analyze evolution to find out.

Are you stupid??? You just jumped from Atheism to evolution like a fuckin' madman... The two aren't necessarily connected. I have a friend who is an atheist who does not think evolution is a fact or remotely true.

If your friend does not think evolution is true, they probably don't have any scientific reason not to believe there is a God. I started with evolution because the overwhelming majority of atheists are either evolutionist or make no claim either way. If you make no claim (agnostic, perhaps), that requires even more belief. To be fair, let's just say I was aiming that analysis against the 99% that doesn't include your friend.

[frankiej]

There are also many people who still believe in a God(s) whilst also thinking that evolution is a fact.

You have done nothing to show that Atheism is a religion... because it is not. Get that into your thick ape-like skull and we can talk about more interesting things.

[Cyberman]

Just out of interest, do you think that scientists have ulterior motives to promote other fields of science or is it merely evolution you consider to be a conspiracy?

[Undeceived]

Just out of interest, do you think that scientists have ulterior motives to promote other fields of science or is it merely evolution you consider to be a conspiracy?

Scientists have motives for making 'discoveries' to further their fields and defending the discoveries already made. No one wants to admit they were wrong. But evolution has a stronger motive being it-- the denial of God and desire not to be held accountable to His judgment. In an article titled "Confession of a Professed Atheist," Aldous Huxley wrote:

I had motives for not wanting the world to have meaning; consequently assumed that it had none, and was able without any difficulty to find satisfying reasons for this assumption... For myself, as no doubt, for most of my contemporaries, the philosophy of meaninglessness was essentially an instrument of liberation. The liberation we desired was simultaneous liberation from a certain political and economic system, and liberation from a certain system of morality.

[Cyberman]

Evolution has nothing to do with the existence of gods (not even God), so the accusation of it denying God is, quite honestly, laughably meaningless. Evolutionary is nothing more than a physical principle of nature, while Evolutionary Theory is the description of that principle and the mechanisms which drive it. Saying that this is an attempt to deny your pet god is on the same level of silliness as someone claiming that the water cycle is a conspiracy of umbrella companies to force people into buying their products. Plus, as has already been pointed out to you, many evolutionary scientists are themselves practising xtians. Evolution and God are not mutually exclusive. I'd point you in the direction of the TalkOrigins index of creationist claims but I don't see anything productive coming from the effort.