No it proves that it can adapt, which is only half the story of evolution.

Here I thought that you were one of the more intellectually honest debaters on this board. North Korean suffering (as all communist peoples' suffering) is a direct result of the systematic killing, syphoning of resources, and the suppression of freedom by the atheistic/communist leadership. People are dying of starvation because Kim Jong Il would rather build nuclear reactors than feed his people. Further, when your main concern is eating, you really don't have time for revolution so it is a tactic used over and over by dictators and communists throughout history.

Starvation caused by capitalism? That is a very interesting comment considering the number of people starving in free societies is not even a fraction of the number unnecessarily starving in communist countries.

Dont get me started. LOL

You keep claiming that, with certainty, yet you provide no factual evidence. On the other hand, I have provided documented and factual numbers to back up my claims.

Speaking of Christendom, the number of rulers and their propensity for war, here I quote at length:

"Although those 1,781 Christian rulers, like rulers everywhere, engaged in wars and indulged in murders and committed plenty of other deplorable deeds, very, very few of them ever engaged in a systematic act of mass murder that can be reasonable described as anything approaching the crimes of the sort committed by Stalin. Nor did most of their later successors..."

"..had this worst of all the medieval monarchs of Christendom (King Charles IX) been a atheist, and had he been responsible for killing twice as many of his subjects as he in fact was, he would still not be numbered among the ranks of the fifty most lethal atheist leaders in history..."

"...there have been twenty eight countries in world history that can be confirmed to have been ruled by regimes with avowed atheists at the helm, beginning with the First French Republic and ending with the four atheist regimes currently extant: the People's Republic of China, the Democratic People's Republic of Korea, the Lao People's Democratic Republic, and the Socialist Republic of Vietnam. These twenty-eight historical regimes have been ruled by eighty-nine atheists, of whom more than half have engaged in democidal (government-instigated mass murder of its own citizens) acts of the sort committed by Stalin and Mao and are known to have murdered at least 20,000 of their own citizens.

The total body count for the ninety years between 1917 and 2007 is approximately 148 million dead at the bloody hands of fifty two atheists, three times more than all the human beings killed by war, civil war and individual crime in the entire twentieth century combined...." ("The Irrational Atheist" - Vox Day)

The Crusades were not about ethnic cleansing. As I said previously, the First Crusade was to recapture the Holy Land which had been taken over by the Muslims. There was no intention or attempt to cleanse the world of Muslims. In fact, the Second Crusade was instigated because a careless Christian ruler (of Edessa) had taken the majority of his army to aid a Muslim ally - leaving his own kingdom vulnerable.

Further, we are not just talking about deaths in war, but deaths that were the result of a government's actions against its own citzens.

58% of atheist leaders end up killing a sizable portion of their own citizens. Is that not a statisically relevant figure? How about the fact that the average number of murders by atheist rulers is 18.3 million percent worse than the worst atrocity committed by a Christian ruler (and there have been 20 times as many Christian rulers as there have been atheist rulers). Does that convince?

Considering the statistically miniscule number of atheist rulers and compared to the fact that not one in a thousand religious leaders have comitted similarly large-scale killings, how can anyone believe anything else but atheism leads to atrocity and human misery?

If it were only one or two atheist leaders that killed on such large scale, one might say it was an anomaly (or a "drought" in your case). But 52 incidents in only 90 years?!! C'mon.

Regarding Hitler;

I said he was a pagan - mostly evidenced by his facination and support of the occult. As dictator, he allocated the modern equivalent of $5.6 million dollars to the research of the occult, medical experiments and expeditions to Sweden, Iraq, Finland and Tibet.

But the main point is that he was not a Christian. You don't have to take my word for it; Robert Wistrich (professor of modern Jewish History at Hebrew University):

"Indeed, the leading Nazis - Hitler, Himmler, Rosenberg, Goebbles, and Bormann - were all fanatically anti-Christian, though this was partly hidden from the German public....The conviction that Judaism, Christianity and Bolshevism represented one single pathological phoenomenon of decadence became a veritable leitmotif for Hitler around the time that the "Final Solution" had been conceived of as an operational plan" ("Hitler and the Holocaust" - Robert Wistrich)

Go for it.

Well first I have to ask you wether or not you think you have a full understanding of the Miller experiment, and what it implies?

Fascination with or even practicing "the occult" IN NO WAY makes one automatically a Pagan. Hitler was no more a Pagan than I am a Christian.