Evolution is part of atheism.

Evolution is a theory of how life acquires the complexity and the forms it has. Given any species such as bacteria or crickets or flies and no way of stopping every possible offspring from growing to adulthood and having every possible organisms likewise the entire planet would, within a very short period of time, be covered with them. There must therefore be some set of natural factors which constantly reduce the number of viable organisms of any species to a much smaller number. Considering animal breeders, farmers, fanciers and all manner of other professions have managed to cause startling and remarkable changes the organisms they selectively breed, it shouldn't be too far fetched to consider that perhaps nature has somewhat the same effect on all the natural species. That within any group of breeders there might occasionally arise a slight difference which makes that organism more likely to have offspring than it's many cousins. Thusly, we should find the struggle of nature, natural selection, and by necessity some organisms having chance changes which cause them to be better adapted towards survival in their niche. By the virtue of the struggle and the happenstance of changes those which improve an organisms chances should be more popular and more frequent and those which do not help an organism within that struggle should become less popular. Now, given this process and the vast stretches of time we now know to exist, this gentle tweaking over a few million and billion years can and does cause species to change and adapt and diversify into all the species we see today. Such a theory makes a startling number of predictions. It requires that the development of life follows a given path, that traits need to be useful when they arose and that if there's no way to gradually change from one form to another they can't do so. Further, the ancestry of organisms is important to know how and why traits evolved and what traits are possible. So occasional humans are born with tails because our ancestors had tails, but none of them are born with wings because none of our ancestors had wings. Whales are born, from time to time, with legs and still have a pelvis bone because they evolved from land walking mammals. All mammals have hair because they evolved from a single hair possessing ancestor, but no mammal is going to be born with feathers because those are not available. Evolution demands a rigid adherence to a tree with traits developing in other branches being unable to switch over. Because the mammal ancestor had no wings, then bat wings are a more recent adaptation and because bird wings are on a different branch they must be different than bat wings, and they are. This is what evolution is. Evolution isn't the theory that life came from atoms. You are confusing it with abiogenesis. Which, likewise, isn't that they appeared out of nowhere but they commonly occur. We get the basic organic compounds everywhere we look, from the moon Titan to asteroids. That with a bit of luck and a lot of time, we can have life arise out of unguided chemical processes. That seems to be where the evidence is leading. Atheism is the lack of a belief in God. You need not deny the existence of God, or disbelief but rather not accept the position as accurate. Atheism is "a-" meaning without and "theism" meaning a belief in God. Just as I don't believe dark matter exists but I'm not bold enough to deny that it does, I can do the same for the question of God. Knowing that religious claims are largely absurd, I do not accept them. That alone suffices to make me an atheist. Agnostics are making a knowledge claim. They may either be atheists or theists but they largely claim that they do not know if there is a god or not. There's no way of knowing and no evidence on the point so they remain agnostic. So on one side we have a firmly grounded, robust, theory that explains the arrangement, form, position, complexity and design of life in the theory of evolution by natural selection and on the other side we have a lack of a belief in God. These are not related in any real way. Evolution is not included in atheism because atheism doesn't include anything. It's a lack of a belief in God. It doesn't have anything. Evolution does not, categorically, say that life came from nothing. It says that life evolved from earlier forms. That statement is remarkably quiet on the origins of the first form. You can believe in God and believe in evolution. Such as Ken Miller who when asked for comment on that sticker placed on the textbook by some religious zealots in the school board commented that the sticker didn't go far enough. The sticker claimed that evolution should be examined critically but ignores the rest of the book and the rest of the biological theory, implying that those should be accepted with an uncritical eye and recklessly. -- Implying that that is the word of the textbook is dishonest and wrong. It is from an unconstitutional sticker placed on the cover of some textbooks by the school board and derided by almost everybody as absurd. They lost the case and lost it rather clearly. Feel free to cite the case if you think I'm stating this in error. -- Evolution by not declaring itself part of a religion does not become part of atheism. There is no sign on the capital lawn declaring that the God exists. Does this mean that the white house is atheistic? The book the cat in the hat does not mention any religion, it is atheistic? The sky contains many clouds but none of the clouds spell out in any clear terms that a God exists, are clouds atheist. If atheism is a religion, then bald is a hair color and not collecting stamps is a hobby. The theory of evolution like the theory of gravity and the laws of thermodynamics have no reference to any gods because they don't need any gods to function. There's no point to atheism. It doesn't have anything to support it. It is the lack of belief in a God. The only argument for atheism ever needed has been the lack of any good reason to accept theism. The lack of a reason to believe in a God is every reason needed to be an atheist. We understand much of the life on this planet because of the theory of evolution. Without the light of evolution, most all of life would seem odd and mysterious and insuperable and quite strange. This has nothing to do with atheism. We simply wouldn't understand life without understanding evolution. This has no bearing on the question of whether we should believe in God or not. Knowing how a magic trick is done doesn't change its nature. -- There are thousands of very well evidenced theories. Not every experiment has a flaw, and even those which do are repeated enough that any mistakes are factored out. Evolution doesn't seek to answer how life started or how hydrogen arises after the initial cooling of the Big Bang. Atheism is not believing in a God. We actually have some pretty good ideas of how life begins and ends without an afterlife. Evolution doesn't say life has any purpose, rather it describes how reproduction and heredity can end up producing extremely amazing and varied forms. There is no overlap between the two. Not all atheists accept evolution. Not all evolutionist are atheists. In fact, most evolutionists aren't atheists as the population of Christian evolutionists exceeds the number of atheists. Considering this, it seems hard to establish what seems complete false. I stand by my claim. -- Evolution is not a part of atheism. Evolution as a theory stands alone and lives and dies by the evidence. Atheism is the non-belief in god(s). It doesn't include anything at all, much less evolution.