I am a hardline agnostic.

Every definition I've seen here of agnostic defines weak agnostic.

Weak agnosticism says "I'm not sure if god exists."

That is not an Agnostic. You can say that is agnostic thinking.

Agnostics with a capital A say that question is unanswerable.

Agnostics DO NOT BELIEIVE IN ULTIMATE TRUTHS!
As an Agnostic with a Capitol A, we believe the question of god is moot.

We also consider athiest believers. We consider athiest no different from theist.

To put it in its most politically incorrect terms, we consider all non Agnostics as arrogant liars.

The dawkins scale of belief:

Strong Theist -- . . . 100% convinced that God exists.
De facto Theist -- . . not 100% but very close.
Weak Theist -- . . . not sure, but still a believer.
Pure Agnostic -- . . . 50/50 chance that God exists.
Weak Atheist -- . . . not sure, but leaning to non-belief.
De facto Atheist -- . . not 100%, but very close.
Strong Atheist -- . . . 100% convinced of no God.

It's really simple.

Theism addresses belief.

Gnosticism addresses knowledge.

I am an agnostic atheist.

Atheist because I do not believe the claims by theists that a god(s) exists. The evidence they have does not pass muster and I have seen nothing that would warrant a belief in any gods.

Agnostic because I do not know that any gods could not exist in any form in any universe.

When there is sufficient evidence to prove the existence of gods, then I will be a theist - and a gnostic theist at that!

for one thing, most atheists can spell atheist (not athiest), while most agnostics can spell agnostic lol. i do not see atheism as questioning religion and "the higher power." i see atheism as not questioning but rejecting "the higher power," which generally leads to a rejection of religion, if said religion involves such a power. it is not itself the rejection of religion, though as i say it generally involves that. when i say "not questioning" i should add "anymore"; certainly some questioning has occurred, but eventually an atheist can be said to have reached something like a conclusion.

here is what isaac asimov said about it:

“I am an atheist, out and out. It took me a long time to say it. I've been an atheist for years and years, but somehow I felt it was intellectually unrespectable to say one was an atheist, because it assumed knowledge that one didn't have. Somehow, it was better to say one was a humanist or an agnostic. I finally decided that I'm a creature of emotion as well as of reason. Emotionally, I am an atheist. I don't have the evidence to prove that God doesn't exist, but I so strongly suspect he doesn't that I don't want to waste my time.”

g

You define all words (including Agnostic Atheist) how you like, the only obligation is to make your own usage clear to the people listening to you. That is why arguments about defining words are ultimately a waste of time, and also why theists love them because they know that you can prove anything if you start by defining the words to suit. E.g. 1+1=2, I will now start using the word "four" to mean two, therefore 1+1=4. The trick is, that they know many people who are naive think that words have fixed meanings, and that therefore if you define a word once, then what applies to that definition must always apply.

But for what it is worth, I always call myself a "Broad Church Skeptic" because although I have very strong views on where I stand, I do see rejecting religion as the main and big thing, and can therefore be tolerant of a wide range of skeptical thinking as long as the thinkers are tolerant of others. You should also check out, Google, the difference between hard atheism and soft atheism, if you wish to understand the "common" usages well.

Pick a belief and go with it. Those who don't believe if sky pixies tend to go with atheism.

1. Agnosticism is a knowledge position: we can't know anything about gods because they're non-falsifiable.

2. Atheism is a belief position: we don't afford belief to the unsubstantiatble (see 1). It is a specific expression of skepticism and critical thinking.

I have come to regard them as two sides of the same coin. I identify as both.

1 is commonly misrepresented as something other than Huxley envisioned for the term -- as a sort of uncertainty about gods, or some statement of "open-mindedness".

2 is commonly misrepresented as positive disbelief and/or positive knowledge of god's non-existence -- a largely theist gaslighting technique that attempts to redefine atheism as something other than a rational, considered position, so that it can be more plausibly dismissed out of hand rather than substantively answered or engaged with.

I still don't know the difference. I just know I can get along with either. Christians really hate it when I tell them there is no Heaven or Hell. Its all made up. I believe in the Universe. God represents something man made and no longer means anything.

Agnostic, I do not know
Atheist, I do not believe

I don't see any reason to believe in gods, so I primarily identify as atheist. I am, however, an agnostic atheist--I do not see the existence of gods as a falsifiable claim, so I cannot tell you there is absolutely no way there are gods. I just find it easier to start with the assumption there are not. Same thing if someone found a unicorn--I start with the assumption there are none, but proof of one would change my mind.
I can tell you about several gods I am certain are not real, though that is a different discussion entirely.

It’s all how you see things in your mind. Both are freethinkers and that to me, is the most important thing.

If you are asking the question do you believe there is a god, gods, or creator of the universe? The theist will say yes, the agnostic will say I don't know, the atheist will say no. So the atheist's answer in this example is a belief there is no god, gods, or creator because any conclusion without knowledge is a belief. I know a few atheists who are allergic to this idea but it is totally logical.

I am an agnostic - anti-theist.

I'm with Penn Jillette on this:
Agnostic and atheist answer two different questions:
We cannot know fur shur how our universe started: agnostic (without knowledge)
There ain't no all powerful invisible critters fucking with humans on the earth: atheist (there is no reliable proof of such beings)

And I agree with Sam, and Christopher,... I am an anti-theist because I oppose religionists imposing their mental illness on all us good folks.

Q1 Does God Exist?
A1 I don't know, I'm an agnostic.
Q2 Do you believe in God?
A2 No, I'm an atheist.

Atheist: That bullshit someone made up about how the universe started is definitely bullshit.
Agnostic: That bullshit someone made up about how the universe started MIGHT be true.

Agnostic = there's probably not a god, but maybe...
Atheist = there is no god. Nope, no maybe.

Atheist excuse the belief in gods entirely where agnostics really aren’t shure of one exists or not and even if gods ever one day proven don’t know which one is the right one

You can search this, it been discussed here dozens of times, almost weekly.

I am atheist. There is no "what if" in my mind.