Is atheism a scientific perspective?

[The Grand Nudger]

You don't seem to understand that you are just asserting that the mechanism by which humans are more complex than a cell is evolution. 

That life evolves is a demonstrable fact, regardless of any religious objection you have regarding the theory of how that might be accomplished.  If we evolved because a cosmic tinkerer made us to do so, we still evolved.  As I said, if yes, you answer your own question.  The truth of the matter in this regard is simple...whether you think a genetic busybody was involved or not, the process is the same.  Tinkerfairies aren't a problem for evolution, but it doesn't require them, so...like I said, DOA.

OFC, up above, I'm operating on the assumption that you're arguing for ID, and not young earth cretinism... god played in the mud last week and here we are sort of shit. If -that's- what you actually believe...may as well drop all the ID nonsense and go back to pounding magic book.

If design is not the only known cause that is capable, then why has nobody proposed another one? If you are talking about natural selection acting on random mutations, we don't know how much information this can produce. This is why it is such a difficult question. We don't know how to quantify information. What we do know is that living systems (specifically eukaryotes) seem to have nearly infinite information contained within their genome. We also know that natural selection and mutation produce information at a nanoscopic rate.

When you say "nobody" you seem to be ignoring a hell of alot of people, all available evidence, and the most successful system for investigating our world that we've yet devised.  It's kind of silly....since you and I both know that the thing you're asking for exists - if you didn't know that, what position, exactly, are you arguing against? 

And I don't think that you can just credit the crowning achievements of biologists to the theory of evolution. The fact is that the theory results in many similar predictions that one would make from design. We also don't know how quickly science would progress if people had design as their point of reference. It may be faster.

OFC I can credit modern synth with accomplishments that were made directly on it's back?  Again, and as always, "design" isn't a problem for evolutionary theory, we do it all the time.  It's called artificial selection.  You'd prefer I at least considered that fairies played a hand...but they didn't.  We do know how quickly biology would progress when people refer to your god as an explanation......we did that for two thousand stagnant years.....