Is atheism a scientific perspective?

[Pat Mustard]

You are missing the point. I don't have to know how something was designed to rationally conclude that it was. And it isn't like we are just looking at biological systems and saying that it just looks designed, it is that we have dissected them to their most fundamental levels in many cases, and intelligent design currently stands alone as the only known force capable of producing it.

Incorrect.  You are the one who has missed the point, which is, the reason we know that cars are designed is BECAUSE we have overwhelming evidence of the design, as well as the designer.  You can't possibly be going for the watchmaker analogy, can you?  It's so famously flawed.  I would have thought a Christian who's been around the block about this as many times as you would have learned better by now...[emoji848]

It always amazes me how creatards are so wedded to that argument, especially when Darwin took the time to show why it's a bad one before elaborating his Theory of Evolution in On the Origin of Species. You'd think they'd be clever enough to not use an argument that's 150 years discredited, wouldn't you?

---

Hmmm links to those studies?

Here's the last paper: http://m.nar.oxfordjournals.org/content/27/5/1223.full, which is discussing the evolution of genetic repair mechanisms in strains of E Coli and a species of yeast.

Interesting how Junk Status, a self-described post-grad biology student, tries to use evidence of evolution happening to disprove evolution happening. If one were a cynical bastard, one would have to conclude that he lied about his educational achievements.