Evolution is not part of atheism.

>>Atheist need a "reason" not to believe in a God. No. They don't. They need a reason to believe there is a God, sans any reason to believe, one need not believe. The question is and remains is evolution a part of a lack of belief in God? My irreverence for religion aside, if one can become an atheist sans evolution then it is certainly true that evolution is not a part of atheism. If atheism is actually just a rational view of the world and a rejection of the absurd, then it follows that evolution is superfluous to this catharsis. You can be an atheist without evolution. In fact, I've met more than a few atheists with a rather poor understanding of evolutionary theory, some who outright rejected it. While I agree that hating the non-existent is as illogical as believing in the non-existent, it might actually make one an atheist if it results in non-belief. A number of people have been shaken loose of their theism. They have had bad things happen to them that any all-powerful all-good guy worth his salt would have prevented. This would be an emotional but perfectly reasonable way of arriving at a non-belief in God. This way would not include evolution. So we can see, again, evolution isn't a part of atheism. Evolution isn't a requirement to atheism. Evolution isn't a doctrine or dogma of atheism. Rather, atheism and evolution seem to be two things that reasonable people accept. I will concede that evolution can provide intellectual satisfaction. As Dawkins put it, evolution allows one to be an intellectually fulfilled atheist. Every theory, fact and model which allows me to better understand the universe provides me some degree of intellectual satisfaction. Intellectual satisfaction is not required to be an atheist and neither is evolution. Baron d'Holbach and others were very outspoken atheists long before evolution came around to solve the pesky problem of the order of life in a neat little package. Whereas once individuals may had their functional epistemologies result in deism, evolution made it reasonably likely that it resulted in atheism. However, this still doesn't establish that evolution is part of atheism anymore than the Big Bang and archeology are parts of atheism. Modern archeology has largely disproved large tracts of the Bible, this certainly is a fairly fulfilling result as far as atheism goes. Is archeology therefore a part of atheism? Evolution doesn't directly combat creation accounts. Rather the facts combat creation accounts and the theory of evolution explains those facts. Even without Darwin's theory we could (and did) establish that there was no global flood and animals progressed and changed over time in ways that were not commiserate with Genesis. The point I am trying to establish is that religion is nonsensical and that is the primary motivation for atheism. It is certainly impressive to have a firmly established scientific theory which explains the arrangement, design, order, function, and form of all life on this planet, but it isn't required. The best argument for atheism is the lack of any good argument for theism. Evolution is an amazing and robust theory to explain and expound upon the life on this planet. However, not accepting the inane because it is inane has nothing to do with accepting the profound because there's an amazing amount of evidence suggesting that it's true. >>The sky being blue, gravity, and optical light do not directly come into conflict with Religion and are more than a Theory. Gravity and the optical refraction of light from the sun are both theories in the proper sense. For the most part they do not come into conflict with religion although that's more because religions have changed to include them. It was believed that the sky was made of metal and the blueness was caused by the waters of the sky which would pour down if the vaults of heaven were opened, and that a particularly local scattering of light by water vapor in the air causing a rainbow was a specific sign from God apologizing for that whole drown the world thing. Further, some sects of Sufi within Islam would reject the idea. It is not that the sky is blue because the the short waved light is more easily diffused by the atmosphere but rather because Allah wills the sky to be blue. -- My acceptance or rejection of these notions in favor of the evidence and opposed to nonsensical has nothing to do with atheism. ---- You can't support atheism. Atheism is the lack of a belief in God. You can make one less likely to accept a belief in God, but that's a far cry from providing support for not believing. There's nothing which could support a non-belief in gods. The difference between Christians accepting the Genesis and atheists believing evolution is that Genesis is actually part of Christianity. How do I know? Because it's in the Bible. -- Beyond having no beliefs, systems, rituals, dogmas, rules, or churches... atheists don't have any sacred texts to not accept. Genesis is certainly part of Christianity whether you accept it or not, it's in the Bible and the Bible is the canon of the Christian faith. There's nothing comparable for atheism. There's a lone lack of belief in God. Many atheists support reason and science and reason and science allows one to conclude that evolution is an extremely acceptable and powerful theory. Likewise many atheists favor stem-cell research, a woman's right to choose, the separation of church and state, and oppose the death penalty. These are positions which a reasonable view of the world regularly results in. This doesn't make these things atheist either. --- You can be a theist and accept evolution, an evolutionist who doesn't accept that God exists, an atheist who rejects evolution or a theist who rejects evolution; they are all acceptable positions. Evolution is the lack of a belief in God or gods whereas evolution is a reasonable scientific theory with a massive amount of evidence supporting it. The claim that evolution part of atheism because evolution shows that the creation myths of religion are naive at best is unacceptable. The truth shows that many religions are silly and false. Atheism is simply not believing in God. I do not believe that fairies exist. Evolution shows us that traits from two distinct lines shouldn't exist. As such, a hominid with insect wings should not exist. -- Does this imply that evolution is part of afairyism?