I'd like to be an agnostic atheist but the idea of god seems sooo ridiculous. I think I'm stuck with gnostic atheism. Talking to someone about god is like talking about teletubbies or mutant ninja Teenage Turtles. Just can't wrap my mind around the fact that a full grown adult believes in that crap.

I'm agnostic because of what I know, or don't know in this case. I can't prove there is no doG.
I'm atheist because of what I believe, or don't believe in this case. I don't believe there is a doG. I’m also dyslexic and used to stay awake late at night wondering if there really was a doG.

I would put myself in the upper right but let me ask you this, I do not claim to be certain that there is no god but instead take a scientific approach.

God is a positive claim. People claim it exists. It is therefore their responsibility to to prove he exists. If they cannot prove he exists then not only is it unlikely, the only logical conclusion is that it does not exist.

When you make a claim that something is there, you can be given some leeway to your claim. Give the evidence that you have. Given enough time and effort, if real it should be proven.

It cannot stand on its own. The Bible excuse is a good example. God exists because he is in the Bible. Harry Potter does not exist but has nearly the same evidence. Given that the Bible has been around for thousands of years and many people have tried to prove God exists but have not in any meaningful way, Harry Potter seems more likely at this point. (except the author doesn't claim that)

I submit that the diagram is correct but doesn't represent the true complexity of the subject. It is somewhat dogmatic.

Nicely laid out. Upper left for me.

I'm and anti-theist, so I'm in the upper right. I don't have any more reason to believe God exists than I do Godzilla. And I know Godzilla doesn't exist.

I don't fit on there.

To me the existence of a god is unknown. I am split 50/50.

My stance is undecided.

These are made up terms. "Agnostic" and "Atheist" are concepts that naturally preclude each other out of difference, and those terms are irrespective of the actual formulations of those concepts. A person cannot simultaneously believe that the existence of a deity(s) is both undeterminable or a definitely incorrect, because those conclusions contradict each other in their real meaning.

Mathematically, anything is possible because it's a mathematical analysis, and it doesn't necessarily have to have a meaning beyond the mathematical, because analytical validity is based on self-referential logical progression and not necessarily sensable premise, although it is always very mentally engaging to see such things, hence my attachment to Mathematics.

So, I say these terms are thus NOT necessary conclusions and are perverted corruptions of the ideas of the thinkers that derived them.

These are made up terms. "Agnostic" and "Atheist" are concepts that naturally preclude each other out of difference, and those terms are irrespective of the actual formulations of those concepts. A person cannot simultaneously believe that the existence of a deity(s) is both undeterminable or a definitely incorrect, because those conclusions contradict each other in their real meaning.

Mathematically, anything is possible because it's a mathematical analysis, and it doesn't necessarily have to have a meaning beyond the mathematical, because analytical validity is based on self-referential logical progression and not necessarily sensable premise, although it is always very mentally engaging to see such things, hence my attachment to Mathematics.

So, I say these terms are thus NOT necessary conclusions and are perverted corruptions of the ideas of the thinkers that derived them.

Similar to another one I post every now and then

Cool so that pretty clearly puts me in the upper left hand corner!

Go Blue. I say that gods do not exist with the same confidence that I say ghosts, vampires, werewolves, poltergeists and other things that go bump in the night , do not exist.