Is atheism a scientific perspective?

[AAA]

Yeah, that's kinda the feeling I got about him. That's why I stopped taking him seriously at all.

It's just one long, drawn-out argument from incredulity.

I have no respect left for creationists.  None at all.  I grok that there's something about evolution that really, really pisses the lot of them off, but I know just enough about biology to suspect that they aren't giving the evidence serious consideration.

Of course, if they did take a serious and unbiased look at evolution, two things would likely happen:

• They would see in short order that evolution is a robust theory supported by physical evidence, and that young-earth creationism in particular is a fucking crock of shit.
  
• They might start applying the same scientific rigor to their beliefs, and see their faith (and any hope of eternal bliss in Happy Fun Jesusland) go spiraling down the loo.
  

Nobody is arguing for young earth creationism. I just get frustrated by atheists who think that they are automatically highly versed in science and intellect just because they are atheists. And you guys are proving my point with these posts: when you don't want to address the argument you just start insulting me. I just want you guys to realize that the theory of evolution (at least the concept of common descent from one ancestor) is not as robust as you think it is.

---

This is at least the third time this guy has come in here and trotted out all this nonsense. I have no idea what he's possibly hoping to achieve. It is a shame his dogma means he has to begin with the assumption of design because it's obviously a barrier to his learning.

I mean, what the hell? Where is the design stage even meant to be? Except for the question of exactly how the first building blocks of life came together (which we are very close to), we have excellent models and understanding about how everything happened without any guidance whatsoever. So the designs must have been before this: either setting up the rules of our reality, or influencing which bits of gunk happen to slowly transition into life or something. Considering theists generally already make the first assumption, I don't know what else needs to be said.

You are so arrogant thinking that my worldview (which has changed significantly throughout my education) is a barrier to my learning. 

And we are not very close to figuring out how the first building blocks of life came together. Saying so just displays ignorance. I am surprised by your assumption that I make an assumption of design. It just supports the first post of the thread. Atheists believe that they are the position of science and that theists are in a world of delusion. Did somebody give you this idea, causing you to become an atheist so you would automatically be considered smarter?