Fine tuning/ programming

First of all, Atheism isn't faith. It's defining characteristic is a LACK of faith. It has a negative defintion, meaning it is defined by what it does not have, instead of what it does have.Secondly, evolution does not require or advocate atheism. There are many theists and deists who study, work on, understand, and believe in evolution. It may not be compatible with your brand of Christianity, but that does not mean no one else can accomplish the fact of reconciling one with the other.AN obvious way to do this is a god that "Big Bangs" the UNiverse and lets everything else go according to the natural laws he put in place. Another is a God who lets things evolve and only tweaks things here and there, perhaps only for humans who pray and whose prayers won't disrupt the natural course he's laid out.It seems to me that anyone who claims that evolution and creation CANNOT be reconciled are those Creationists with the weakest faith.

Not quite. Lacking a belief doesn't imply a belief in the opposite. I don't have to believe a god DOESN'T exist in order to not believe. For instance, I could just stop at, "I don't know," I'm still an athiest, meaning I don't actually believe, but I also don't actually disbelieve.I happen to believe a God is improbable, but I could easily be convinced if any evidence of an unambiguous nature were to turn up.

But it is highly indicative. If something doesn't exist, you would expect to find no evidence of its existence, right? And I assure you, I try not to believe in things for which I have no empirical evidence. Everytime I have done so, I have ended up disappointed. I may entertain flights of fancy and maybe even have hope that some empirical evidence will show up for something I sincerely wish were true, but if asked soberly whether I believed in any of those things, I'd be forced to sigh and say no. Nor can it disprove the existence of Shiva, or the FSM, or ghosts, or fairies, or any other supernatural being. Which of these should I believe in and why? They've all got the same amount of evidence (none) and if that were enough to inspire belief, I'd be stuck with contradictions and logical impossibilities galore. The best I can be on any of these is a lack of belief without the corresponding belief in the lack.