The way I have known it, Buddhism in eastern culture where it originated is still seen as more of a religion, while in the west it is mainly a philosophy or way of life. When Buddhism was first brought over to the west, to make it accessible it was adapted to the western mindset. One of the first to bring it to the west was Chögyam Trungpa: [shambhala.org]

Ummm, youcould meditate, and treat all living things with respect, etcetc and not label yourself......

Very good question. I too wonder this, being interested in buddhism's principles but being quite sure that there are exactly zero supernatural beings.

I respect aspects of Buddhism, and although I don't identify as Buddhist, one could totally be a Buddhist and an atheist because Buddhism doesn't have a deity on offer. The definition of "atheist" is narrow, so the fact that Buddhism has an imagined cosmology populated by enlightened humans, sort of like Catholic saints, and various afterlife beliefs, is still compatible, particularly if you take those things metaphorically rather than literally.

There are a number of religions that are "atheistic". Taoism is the other one that immediately comes to mind. There are a small sub-sect of atheistic Quakers, too. Such religions may have asserted truths, a priest class, an afterlife, and various other supernatural dogmas, but no deity or really even a deity substitute. Religion is generically a set of beliefs and rituals for the faithful to coalesce around, that usually, but not always, include deities.

I would imagine that believing in karma and rebirth would make you unsientific... Not a theist.

What I found Buddhism incompatible with free inquiry and scepticism was:

1. karma. They say that there is no great engineer behind it and that it's what you do is what you get. But we see people who do good things get bad things as a result, and that brings us to
2. rebirth. If you don't stop desiring you constantly get reborn as something new without any knowledge of who or what you were. That's why sometimes when you do good things you get bad in result. Because of your past lives. Eat that said the rich unto the poor and life continued its formalistic course...
3. The Buddha spoke of other plains and entities. They are not mandatory for the belief, not important in the course of events. They are just different. How did he know?

Now you can be a Buddhist without the third, but can you really be a Buddhist without the first two? And to Buddha's defence he said, just practice and see. If you don't like something, ditch it. There are no doctrines according to Buddhism. Just practice and experience...

The reason why I bother so much is because whenever I practice Buddhism I see lots of benefits for my wellbeing. But my mind can never seem rest compressing it to only meditation... Because if meditation is so good and led other people to become better beings, then there must be something behind it. And that's how I always enter this conversation with myself.

[balancedachievement.com]
It seems that the Buddha was agnostic when asked about god. There are many branches of Buddhism just as there are many branches of Christianity. Some branches of Buddhism (e.g. Tibetan) kept their religious traditions after the arrival of Buddhism. Yes, you can define your self as Buddhist and Atheist at the same time. It depends which path you follow. You may find the link above useful. Good luck!

Anyone can define himself/herself any way they want. It may or may not be accurate, but it is what it is.

I consider myself an atheist, buddhist, and also satanist. I see no contradictions necessary, why would there be? Buddhism has no god or supernatural element to believe in, and satanism (the satatanic temple variety at least) doesnt involve a literal belief in satan either; hes a literary character and an avatar for going against the grain more or less. I also consider myself Taoist, pastafarian, and dudeist. All are non theistic religions meant to either free you from or to assist in trolling the average believer.

If you consider that Buddhism is a religion which believes in some supernatural things like rebirth then yes they are in conflict. In that case Atheist should really mean "Do not believe in the original Christian religion I was raised with" vs. Atheist. Now some philosophies in Buddhism are good to follow (Emotional well being etc), if you believe in everything, you are not A-theist.

In winter I’m a Buddhist, but in summer I’m a nudist. Does that help?

I do and no they don’t.

i don't know whether they conflict. some say no. i myself am not a buddhist, but i am an atheist and a jew at the same time. i like judaism but do not follow it. i like jewishness and i embrace it. so it's not the same thing, since buddhism would be something you followed. whether or not they conflict may have to do with how you perceive buddhism and you how perceive your relationship to it.

g