Atheism is a religion

[Whateverist]

Let me endeavor to explain what evolution really is—what scientists don’t tell you:

That is exceedingly kind and condescending of you to break it down for us. Who knew that scientists were part of a vast conspiracy to discredit god almighty. Hallelujah!

Yet science must operate by a number of assumptions. First, that God does not exist.

Science does not concern itself with whether your or any other god exists. Science is concerned with natural phenomena and so its theories do not involve unnatural phenomena. If any of your gods ever do show up for science to examine, they will no longer be supernatural. Until then, science and we will leave gods to you. I'm sorry if you feel left out by science but it isn't personal, just definitional. If you want theories about the what isn't part of the natural world you will only find them in pseudo sciences such as creationism and that sort of thing.

Second, since God does not exist, a theory for how the universe came to be without Him must be made.

So you're saying we're on the clock here? Science must either explain in fine detail exactly how the world/universe has come to be, or else concede that god did it? Um, no.

Finally, using the assumption of evolution, scientists endeavor to prove evolution with dating.

Real science does not set out to prove anything, in the sense of "establish" or "show to be so". I'm sure there are scientists who do have agendas which they serve rather than seeking the truth -all creation 'scientists' for example. There will always be some in any profession who are unethical or incompetent, and I'm sure that is even true of scientists who are not creationists. That doesn't say anything about science itself, but merely the failings of some individuals.

Once again, scientists ignore logic in hopes of there being additional evidence for them further down the line.

Science is an empirical enterprise concerned with a posteriori, not a priori, knowledge. Those who sit around thinking about logical necessity and attempting to show what follows from given premises are logicians, not scientists. Of course, an understanding of logic is necessary to formulate useful hypotheses to test. But science does not decide its theories based on logic, but rather on what explanations best fit the know data.

Some scientists get around this by suggesting organisms can pick up pieces of their surroundings, like leaves or feces. But let's be real.

And other scientists are fine with not knowing a thing until we do. There are unanswered questions. Given. Does that mean we need "god did it" in the mean time? No. You might but we don't.

In an article titled "Confession of a Professed Atheist," Aldous Huxley wrote:

I had motives for not wanting the world to have meaning; consequently assumed that it had none, and was able without any difficulty to find satisfying reasons for this assumption... For myself, as no doubt, for most of my contemporaries, the philosophy of meaninglessness was essentially an instrument of liberation. The liberation we desired was simultaneous liberation from a certain political and economic system, and liberation from a certain system of morality.

That may be but it is a completely separate matter. Some scientists and/or atheists may have a bent toward "meaningless" others don't. What of it?

Please don't respond unless you have scientific refutations for my claims.

Bite me. Not your call.