wow, how many things can you get wrong in a single post, ray?
God DID do it, the evidence says so. To say this "emasculates science" presupposes a pro-Materialism attitude
How is saying "God Did it" without any explanation of how god did it a useful answer? What does it tell us about the world? Does it explain how thinks work?
Imagine:
Son: Daddy, why is the sky blue?
Dad: God did it.
Son: How did god do it?
Dad: God did it.
Son: But how?
Dad: Cause God can and he did.
Son: can you answer the question meaningfully?
Dad: yes; god did it.
In reality, we know the sky is blue because of refraction of light hitting water (and other substances) molecules and the absorbtion of specific spectrums of light (visible and otherwise) by those molecules. Understanding how colors are created can be important for any number of fields, having applications fromp physics to painting.
The purpose of science is to understand how and why things happen with meaningful answers. By removing god from the explanation, you remove the easy, non-meaningful answer and false answers and it allows you to get to the heart of the matter. God in the picture allows for any possibility to be true (if the god is omnipotent and/or omniscienient and/or all-knowing) or no answer whatsoever, allowing no furtherance of useful knowledge. This does not mean that god (if you believe in him) is not at the controls or the cause of what is happening, but rather, the naturalistic or materialistic explanations are how god does it.
Since all Atheists are evolutionists
False.
evolution is the positive evidence . . .evolution is an assumption . . .assumptions are not evidence
Good contradiction. Not only is your argument wrong logically (not all atheists are evolutionists and you are missing a second premise to draw your conclusion) but you have contradiction yourself in claiming that evolution is evidence and then saying it isn't. Happy?