Is atheism a scientific perspective?

[RoadRunner79]

    You want him to eliminate the unknown now....



The argument from ignorance, is assuming ones position, until it is shown to be false.  (which I might add, appears to be what your are doing).  It is a form of shifting the burden of proof.

I.D. does give positive reasons, why choice; and therefore an intelligent designer better explains the evidence.  It is not just, we don't know, therefore it must be designed!  It is relying on what we do know to make an inference.

bold mine

And the inference? We don't know enough, therefore design. We are uncomfortable with we don't know, therefore design. I can't think for myself, therefore design.

Oh, wait, fantasy delusion can explain anything and everything. OOOOhhhhh baby, now that's the stuff!

Is this a strawman... or just self reflection?

---

Are you saying, that making an inference is an argument from incredulity?  How would you categorize the inferences made in light of evolution then?

An inference based on a probably mythological entity, with no supporting evidence, is indeed an argument from incredulity.

The inferences made in light of evolution are based on testable physical evidence.

Ok... thanks, You don't seem to be describing what I believe, or the way I.D. reasons, but I just wanted to make sure, that you where not saying that making an inference from the evidence to the cause was not an argument from ignorance.