I became an agnostic because, from my perspective, there isn't enough evidence to prove whether there is a God or Higher Powers or not. I think atheism is based more on belief rather then empirical evidence and science, though much evidence would concur that there isn't a God.
Atheism is a lack of belief. Its why you can be an agnostic atheist. The terms are not really equivalent. Atheism requires nothing be a lack of belief, you don't need reason to be atheist. You are born atheist. You are taught something, then fall out of belief and claim to be agnostic. You are an agnostic atheist. I was an atheist for a long time before I ever bothered to understand why I was atheist. Now that I have studied religion's through history, I can tell you why I am atheist, but atheism requires nothing to justify it other then a lack of belief in a god or gods.
Atheism is not the assertion that there is no god. Atheism is the lack of belief in a god. If you lack belief in a god (which you appear to), then you are an atheist, plain and simple. Gnostic and agnostic are qualifiers used to describe theist and atheist. Technically, you are in fact an atheist, even if you don't realize it. Specifically, you would be an agnostic atheist, meaning you lack belief in a god but don't claim to know that one doesn't exist. Agnostic and gnostic aren't really separate categories; they're sub-categories of atheist and theist.
There has been nothing in 56 years of life that has lead me to believe in the existence of God. Truthfully, I find the idea unbelievable and the opposite of how The natural world is. It makes absolutely no sense to me. I find it funny how we read our children fairy tales explain how they’re not real, but we’re expected to believe that the fairytales of God Are real? And yes I say fairytales. They follow the same premise.
Reality gives me no reason to believe an omnimax god exists.
The problem of evil, when scrutinized, sealed the deal for me on my journey to unintentionally becoming a heathen.
Agnosticism and atheism are mutually exclusive, btw.
Atheism and theism speak to belief.
Agnosticism and Gnosticism speak to whether knowledge can be had on a topic, in this case, god(s).
You wrote 'there isn't enough evidence to prove whether there is a God or Higher Powers or not.'
Saying there isn't enough evidence appears to imply the existence of SOME evidence that god exists.
Feel free to post the evidence, I really want to see it.
I can say that there is absolutely NO evidence that there is a God. Only based on superstition and a need to explain the unexplainable without doing the work to find out one way or the other. Science is hard and requires people with the most serious minds and intellect. Religion is easy. Just believe everything the Clergy tells you.
We A-theists are not A-Deists... A-theists has the same approach as agnostics when thinking of a Supercreator may exists. But even if it exists (or not) we know it does not interfere in people life. (Where the name anti theism comes from this spot)
And this is where we are differencing with agnostics. Agnostics should say " we do not have enough evidence so it may interfere with human life etc.." (which means theistic gods or religions may be true and may be not.) But we atheist know that is all some myth. And there is no maybes when it comes to think about theistic gods.
In conclusion; No theistic gods exists. But deistic ones ( creation of known universe or the creator) may exists.