The difference between ethical atheism and nihlism is that ethical atheists have more faith

[genkaus]

genkaus you are not arguing your points, you are just repeating what you presuppose.

And what is it that I presuppose?

Please explain to me how naturalistic evolution can be teleological.

The mistake here would be thinking that if anything is teleological then there must be an intelligence behind it. Simply put, it'd be a matter of the angle you are looking at it from. For example, if you see a tree as a system then everything in it does perform a specific function towards specific goals. In that sense, there is a specific purpose behind each sub-system. But to assume that this implies a specific intelligence within each system or even a central intelligence would be incorrect.

How can you distinguish people as being the end of naturalistic evolution more than anything else evolution touches?

I wouldn't. Since I never assumed that people were the end of naturalistic evolution.

And you can you consider evolutionary processes to be the goal of the forces that created them?

Depends on what they are.

Maybe if you are a Deist, certainly if you are Christian. Not as a naturalist.

Even as a naturalist. Which - as a matter of record - is not necessarily my position.