Atheism is a religion

[TheDarkestOfAngels]

A 1991 Gallup poll of Americans found that about 5% of scientists identified themselves as creationists, and that didn't include those convinced of Intelligent Design, or simply unconvinced of evolution. Saying they 'aren't doing it based on science' is a straw man argument. Can you read their minds?

No, saying they are convinced of intelligent design because they aren't doing it based upon science is a statement of fact.
Since you appear to simply be listing fallacies in completely inappropriate contexts, I'll remind you of what a strawman arguement is:

A straw man is a component of an argument and is an informal fallacy based on misrepresentation of an opponent's position. To "attack a straw man" is to create the illusion of having refuted a proposition by replacing it with a superficially similar yet unequivalent proposition (the "straw man"), and refuting it, without ever having actually refuted the original position.

Since I did not create an artificial position for myself to refute, I did not create a straw man arguement.

I know this isnt' a a straw man arguement to say that Intelligent Design isn't science because everyone who, to my knowledge, is promoting intelligent design has zero evidence that this is the case and the arguements that HAVE been made have either been outright fabrications or misrepresentations of evidence (that is to say, saying something is evidence of intelligent design despite not supporting it at all) or based upon fallacious arguements.

As such, intelligent design has zero evidence to support it and the so-called evdience proposed to support it (the eye is something many such individuals point to as evdience of design) is misrepresented (the arguement is that the eye cannot occur through natural evolution) and can easily be refuted by actually understanding how evolution works given that many christians and ID supporters appareantly do not. (That is to say that the eye can, has, and would do so again given the evolutionary advantage it brings to those who evolve such a structure.)

So, that is a rough idea as to why intelligent design isn't science.
There's also the fact that all of science is falsifiable and ID and especially YEC is not.

The first hit in my google search:
http://creationists.org/former-evoltioni...tists.html
Many scientists become Christian because of their scientific discoveries. Mathematician and physicist Frank Tipler said:

Yeah - not buying it. You show me peer-reviewed papers by any of those individuals (peer reviewed by scientists and published in scientific journals - not church/religious sources) and I'll give those people some credance.
I can't tell you how many ministers claim to have said that they were once atheists because they were angry at god (or something similar) and then found their way. The entire explaination just shows how little they understand of atheism and I would dare say that those 'scientists' simply weren't or at least aren't anymore.

Perhaps you could locate published papers (rejected or not) that those individuals made when they were scientists as well as the research that supposedly convinced them. Given that I see nothing in your link but what may as well be BS, I see no reason to accept it as anything but.

I can guarentee you that the evidence in support of evolutionary science on this thread is rife with links and sources to peer-reviewed scientific papers and on the off-chance they didn't, you could easily perform your google searches on evolution and look around yourself.

To claim that a large number of people believing in one thing makes it true is an appeal to popularity fallacy. My challenge still stands. Can anyone give me true scientific support for evolution? The burden of proof is on you.

And where, pray tell, that I mention that evolution is true BECAUSE a majority of people BELIEVE it? I made the claim that evolution is true because THERE IS EVIDENCE FOR IT - something that intelligent design lacks. It lacks falsifiability and evidence making it not science.
Given that the evidence for evolutionar has already been provided on this thread for you and given that you're the one making the claim that intelligent design is anything other than BS, then I believe that means you're the one making the positive claim - not us.

I recommend that you use your google-fu to summon up some evidence for intelligent design in your next post because you've provided a heaping bowl of nothing thus far.

When you do, I myself and others will be more than happy to explain to you exactly why it's bullshit in much greater detail.