Is atheism a scientific perspective?

[Chas]

You can't just assert that evolution is an adequate cause. he

How much information per generation does natural selection coupled with mutation produce? How many generations have there been? How much information is contained by the genome. Until we know the answer to all three of these we will not know if natural selection+mutation is adequate. 

The algorithm is sufficient to accomplish what we see. Calculate the number of organisms and reproduction events that have existed in the last 3,000,000,000 years (they are staggeringly large numbers) and you will see that there has been plenty of room for the amount of evolution we observe.

And you don't think that lifestyle impacts our genetic output? That's like the whole point of epigenetics. Environmental stimuli lead to heritable changes in transcription. Eating meat is not a more efficient means of nutrition. Nut consumption has a much higher assimilation efficiency than meat.

Tell that to the Inuit. Pound for pound, there is far more nutrition in meat than in plant matter.

Also, you have to consider that the meat itself has disseminated most of the energy of the primary producers when it was alive.

That is a ludicrously incorrect statement. Pound for pound, there is far more energy content in meat than in plant matter.

Therefore, skipping the middle man is a much more efficient way to eat from an energy perspective.

See above.