Is atheism a scientific perspective?

[Angrboda]

AAA:

It's clear that your approach to this discussion is driven by several concerns.

1.  denying science, primarily in the form of denying evolution.  It's clear that evolution provides a model for how complexity can arise from simple beginnings, so you resist it at every step.  If evolution can explain how single celled organisms can give rise to humans, the goo to you story becomes much more plausible.  Do you have a pre-existing belief that all life was created essentially as it now stands?  What is that belief based on?

2. god of the gaps, primarily in the form of concentrating on the weaknesses in abiogenesis.  It's true that the search for a solution has been proceeding for some time, but that doesn't mean we should consider the search "closed" to further enquiry.  When determining when to stop looking, one has to take into account the difficulty of the question and how long science has been researching it.  On both scores, it seems premature to close off enquiry at this stage.  One should always prefer to await rational explanations for things, and remain agnostic toward the subject in the meantime.  You don't appear agnostic to the question of abiogenesis.  What drives your desire to close off enquiry?

3. negative arguments, primarily of the form "Not X, therefore Y."  You most certainly realize that this undermines not only those arguments you share with us, but also the arguments you have adopted to support your pre-existing beliefs.  Doesn't the fallacious nature of your negative arguments bother you?

This is the strategy of a creationist.  Call yourself an intelligent design advocate all you want, the truth is you are no different from a creationist in the way you go about your argument.  Do you believe that your God created all the forms of life that exist?  Is that belief rooted in a literal interpretation of Genesis in the bible?