Maybe this will help you.
I don't give a fuck.

I don't try to influence anyone, that's what religious people do. I'm glad you're coming to your own conclusions.

Exactly. They can't comprehend that people don't share their beliefs. They find it necessary to define them.

@barjoe More like pigeon hole people they can't define them so they sort them into groups with made up labels like "demon worshipper" or "baby eater"...
They go completely off their nut when you play the game with them on social media by doing things like trading "babby recipes..."

I can remember many years ago in Fundie School, as a child, being instructed to consider any disagreement with the doctrine we were given as a personal attack from a hellbound sinner. They really, really wanted to quash any inclination we might ever have to entertain the idea that what they were telling us might not be true. Serious brainwashing from pre-school on.

You have to understand it’s not fairy tales to some people. They honestly believe everything because they have been taught as a child that if they don’t they will be tortured forever and ever

Nulifidian would be a good answer when church people ask what religion I am.

I am not open to even the most infinitesimal possibility that the supernatural exists. Theists who don't accept the tenants of organized religion, but still believe in ghosts, ESP, afterlife, a creator, higher power or other fairy tales call themselves agnostic. They can call themselves what they want. I don't agree.

Many theists claim they to know there is a God, and they also claim they have a personal relationship with that God.

Of course their claims are unfounded.

Last, based on everything we know there is no reason to even suspect there is a God.

@Alienbeing Religion is an hallucination.....having a relationship with a non-existent entity.

@barjoe interesting...so if real scientific evidence existed for a god or gods...you would act much like a religious person would...

@Alienbeing true, but we don't know everything...there may be a diety just not one we can fathom...or should worship...or one that is remotely aware of us.

@MakeItGood Real scientific evidence does NOT exist. You entertain whatever possibilities make you happy. I will not.

@MakeItGood Your "there may be" is a reference to nothing. As such there is no reason to believe.

@barjoe like ANY scientific evidence in general? None of ir exists?

@barjoe, @Alienbeing the same reasoning applies to the your claim as well. Thats the point. You don't get to apply it to one side only.

@MakeItGood I can apply anything I want to. Who are you to define me or tell me what I get to do?

@MakeItGood No the same reasoning does not apply AT ALL. No reason is a FACT. Try to prove me wrong by coming up with a reason.

@Alienbeing well the reason is the fact we do not know everything and that if we look at our history of physics and astronomy...that stuff is not reasonable to come up with. No one could reasonably predict or guess that the Sun is a huge ball of gas powered by nuclear reactions when it looks so small in the sky. That only came after studying nature carefully and reasoning from what was observed. People thought light was a wave, electrons are particle s, but it turns out they both are both.

All I'm saying is our scientific experience is clear: we are likely to get something that contradicts our expectations and assumptions. And I think a sentience is entirely likely because we don't know the full aspect of the existence.

@MakeItGood Poor, very poor try. Saying we don't know everything is NOT a reason to assume anything. Do you suspect a God for everything you don't know? Not knowing is no reason to suspect a mystical force.

Your comment about the Sun is also shallow, and cites an improper conclusion. We did not realize the Sun was gas by studying Nature. We studied Physics and learned. Apparently you don't hold Science very highly.

@Alienbeing i agree but you make my point! why assume something doesn't exist when you already say don't assume something does exist. Instead say I don't know if either is true or not. Thats the most correct answer: a literal "I don't know". Both sides are possible and we can assign probabilities just yet.

Dude...Im a physicist. In my tiny area of expertise let me tell ya what I know for sure: physics studies nature! Okay? Thats what we observe and model!. We studied the natureof the sun: the luminosity, the spectral decomposition of hydrogen and helium lines, the orbit of earth around it, that such a mass would undergi extreme gravity and the gas would collect and start thermonuclear reactions,

If you don't like the sun analogy I can give you one dealing with the nature of particles and fields at the quantum regime. Either way we have ample evidence that natures doesnt give an either or answer...so the best answer we should have right now is i dont.knoe

And thats agnosticism.

@MakeItGood No, I did not make your point at all. Saying there is no reason to believe in no way relates to your first sentence. I also note you have yet to come up with any reason to believe or even suspect. Your "I don't know" does not cause any reason to believe. We don't know many things, that does not infer we should think there may be something.

If you are a physicist you ignore much. What in your educational background even infers a God?

Your rationalizations actually make my point. Your ramble without conclusion. When you can come up with any reason to believe, let me know.

Were shouldn't care if people agree with us. That's for THEM to care about. I just don't want them to define me. That's no better than fucking Christians trying to convert me. I am just an Atheist. I don'tclaim to be open minded about anything.

so, i'm not really interested in debating it, but there are apparently (at least) two definitions of "agnostic," one being "the opposite of gnostic," and the other being...some derivation or dilution of that, so accordingly, saying stuff like "I remain an agnostic atheist and that viewpoint is not a religion" will have you being perceived as "gnostic" by some, since you speak as if you know. And believing there is no God might easily become a religion i guess, just like "Science" or most any other concept, so no offense meant but the meme is mostly gratuitous shit, imo; atheism is just the opposite of theism, right? Both believers, iow?

@bbyrd009 Non-Believer. Not a Agnostic. Atheism is not a Religion. It's my belief. I'm not a member of a group. I just know there is no god. I don't try to influence others. If people need to explain their fears, I don't want to upset them. To thine own self be true. I don't want to be part of an atheist community. Just me, myself and I.

@barjoe "Non-Believer...
It's my belief."
i guess we're all a bit conflicted prolly

@bbyrd009 A religious believer is not me. I have a "belief" that there is no fucking God. That is not a religion. I don't go to church. I would never go to an Atheist gathering. I don't need to reaffirm with other people what I know.

@barjoe funny thing about definitions, i guess we tend to pick the one most comfortable for us?

@bbyrd009 Everyone has the right to define themselves. They don't want to be defined..

@barjoe ah, rights
yeh

@bbyrd009 Had "rights" become a dirty word?

@barjoe oh ha guess it depends upon the context?
let's just say it's often a clue-word imo

My understanding is an agnostic is not having any knowledge a god exist, and an atheist is not believing in gods.

@xenoview Indeed! Which is why, as one who lacks any knowledge (or fact pattern) of any deity upon which to base a belief, I am equally comfortable with both “labels.”

@p-nullifidian I agree with you.

"Everything else in the universe I'm just assuming is true until I get the proof."

If I understand this position correctly, to simply assume something is 'true' (i.e., factual) while waiting for the 'proof' is, IMHO, illogical.

@mischl Everything in the universe is false until I see credible evidence.

@p-nullifidian I misspoke. Apology and correction above.

@mischl No need to apologize... we’re all humans. Peace.

He wasn't the Lone Ranger.

@David1955 don't you mean a loon not a lune?

[dictionary.com]

@David1955 Lune is a crescent shape, loon is derived from lunatic.

@barjoe are you saying Danger Dave was half moon shaped or only came out then?

@FrayedBear Lune is a crescent shape. Loon is a crazy person. Dave is a stubborn person.

@barjoe which both relate to the word luna, regarding the moon lunatics thought to come out on a full moon. So connected too.