> Atheism is incompatible with determinism.

No, its not.

Argument by dismissal and hand waving at your opponent is generally how you left wing people debate.

No, its not. See, e.g., most of my post history.

Sometimes, OTOH, completely moronic ideas are offered without any support, and without it, contradiction is all they warrant.

I won't debate any further with someone who resorts to name-calling or dismissive language. You didn't provide a proof of contradiction or any argument. I provided valid reasons and evidence to support my point of view.

> I won't debate any further

You weren't debating before, just posting unsupported conclusions with no argument in support, and complaining about responses in kind.

You're right, but you are being pretty harsh and insulting, and it does distract from your point and make it just about impossible for the other commenter to hear what you're saying.

Why do they have to be designed?

Complexity implies a creator if you can't cite the theory of evolution. You are trying to say "nothing" designed them and they lack any intelligent design. GA have intricate, complex rules and codes. There is and has only been one version of the algorithm.

I find the atheist to be the largest proponents of determinism. Most religions Embrace some idea of a soul, free will, and agency.

On the other hand, almost every atheist I know believes in some form of material determinism. For them, individual Behavior is entirely driven by the physical makeup of an individual and their interacting environment. They deposited if you had a sufficiently accurate model of the universe you would be able to determine every action they would make.