You should re-read the thread. This has been very clearly answered and explained.

If you're looking for some authority to just tell you "the answer" with regards to "atheism" then you're looking at the question in entirely the wrong way.

So you're an agnostic when it comes to the Tooth Fairy too?

If you had lived 200 years ago, would you have been an "atheist" or an "agnostic" in regards to quantum mechanics?

My guess is that if Niels Bohr would have time-traveled back to to the 1800's, he would have been completely ridiculed by the vast majority of scientists. What he said would have been regarded as the same as saying, "the Tooth Fairy is real".

There's a difference between theoretical science, which is based logic and mathematics, and theism. The statement "If X then Y" is different from "X is true".

Why, when he can show the math and the experiments?

Oh
My
God

You came out of retirement to make this comment about an innocuous statement by DS. Surely, Bunny, you are capable of making a more meaningful contribution. I would be willing to lay eleven to ten on that.

I haven't come out of retirement. I just flicked through a couple of threads to see who was still around.

The fact he (still) thinks that is hilarious. He has every opportunity to learn here but hasn't yet worked out that he isn't the teacher.

DS can speak/defend himself; I will not put words in his mouth.

Many people are still around, some are not and have moved on to other things I assume. Some may have even died. No ghost posts to report on that front but I could be wrong.

Are you living well and still enjoying your sojourn on this rather silly ball of rock vomit?

I certainly wish you well.

bunny is a wonderful poster, even if he/she/it does live in a state that's the laughing stock of the rest of Australia. Sad to lose him/her/it.

He. (Though the alias always made people think I was a girl).

Thanks for the positive review - although I think you're wrong. When I posted here regularly I was unusual rather than wonderful, imo.

Cheers.

I'm doing okay (though I'm living worse now I'm an atheist, I think). Currently having discussions about divorce which is not a pleasant thing, no matter what the dynamic. It was probably that which prompted me to stick my head in here, to be frank.

To me that is a problem. But I differentiate between a deity, which might have created matter, and a god, which (so far as I can ascertain) in all religions listens to our prayers and decides which ones to grant, and then, when we die, places us on his/her/its right hand (presumably sitting) for the eternity even though so far as I know no instruction had been given about who does the cooking, or who washes up, or whether we have to go to the toilet, or from where the chairs are purchased. That's not being awkward - to me that's a logical problem..

Can anyone here see the difference? I regard myself as an atheist. Am I not an atheist?

Both the word "believe" and "atheist" mean different things to different people. Why is it so important that the definition be pinned down when there is no doubt what you mean when you add a few more words, as you did above, (or specify the odds you will lay)?

Sure i differentiate too. Its more about showing the idea the universe could of been intentionally created is not that far out there. So it should give more understanding to theists thinking that, if not the add-ons.

Bunny!

Had to stop in and say "Hi". Miss the interaction with you. Sorry to hear that you are going through a rough patch. Be strong.

its a sign of a stubborn child.

a sign of a spirit who wants to go its own way and not Gods Way clearly shown to all the mankind trough God Himself who put on flesh and walked the earth.

a sign of a person who is highly decieved by materialsm, man in power and evil spirits. lust of power and riches.

Id say its the personal choice anyone makes, most have to believe in something wether its any god or any other superior being, as well as believeing there isnt one

I have long been what most would term an atheist, but I don't like to classify myself as such. This thread brings up some interesting points that I have made many times often to no avail.
I don't like the word believe, I don't believe in anything. Belief inherently implys doubt:
What is the difference between these two statements:
I believe my car is white
My car is white.
The belief implys some doubt that my car may not be white.
I don't need to believe in things, there is stuff that happens and stuff that doesn't happen. There is cause and effect. If I input a set of circumstances into any scenario the output is possible to calculate using rules that I will re-appropriate.
Yes somethings are so inherently complex it is impossible to analyse completely, but I don't need belief to fill in the gaps, I don't need to imply any doubt that the method may be wrong, it's just I'm not bright enough to solve the problem yet.
This is what science essentialy boils down to, the solution to an ever increasingly difficult problem to solve. That doesn't mean I have doubt that it can be solved, or that I believe it will be solved.
It just means that it is solvable, just maybe it isn't solvable by a human mind.

One ought to believe in the law of gravity. Those who don't believe tend to make a bloody mess on the pavement.

Kind of missing the point I made....

I have no doubt that there is gravity, I don't need to believe in it, I don't need to think it, I dont bees to imply any doubt at all in the simple fact that gravity is holding me down, that it is keeping the planets/ stars/ in orbits.

Gravity is keeping me on the ground. It does maintain orbits by producing a constant inwards acceleration. I don't believe these things to be correct, I know they are correct.

Belief implies doubt, I don't have doubts about what I know, I have things that can be explained, and verified. Truths of you will.
And things that may or may not be true, as they cannot ir have not been verified/proved... I don't believe in these things or not, I just don't know yet, so both the possibility of it being correct and incorrect exist..

A life without doubt?

So when someone open raises you "know" 100% their range is top 20%?
So you "know" 100% when you go to the casino parking lot at 2 am with a full wallet you won't get robbed?
So when you are riding in car , you "know" 100% another car will not smash into you?
So you "know" 100% when you ask Angelina for a date it will all go well?
So you “know” 100% that your restaurant food doesn’t have salmonella?

Not so much a life without doubt, but a life without belief....
If some one opens utg can I range them 100% actually, of course I can't, but I have incomplete information. Given complete information I wouldnt need to assign a range, I would know the whole cards.

I don't know that I won't get robbed tonight, again I have incomplete information, if I knew who was in the car park when I was then I woukd have said information and would be able to accurately determine what will or won't happen.

Science is striving continually for 'complete' imformation, of we have all the info we can solve the problem....religion has always been used to fill the parts of our mind that are dealing with incomplete information, we don't know what happens when we die, we will never have complete information on this, which will always allow religion to fill that information gap for us.

That information gap can only be filled by belief, because we can never have certainty with complete information.

All I am saying is why do we need to fill that gap with a belief, why can't we just leave it as I don't know.
When I die I'm going to be buried in the ground and I'm going to slowly decompose, beyond that I have no further information but I don't need to complete that scenario with I believe I will go to hell because Allah hates gambling, or I believe I'll go to heaven because I raise money for a children's charity.....

I don't believe anything, I have stuff I know and stuff I dont know, I can make accurate or inaccurate predictions on what will happen based on the information available, but I don't believe that telling my gf she looks fat will get me a slap, I know it... Equally I don't believe my opponents hole cards are top 20% based on his utg open, I know he has two cards that are likely to be in the top 20%. I don't believe that I will get robbed in the car park, I know it's really unlikely because they have cameras everywhere and security.....

Some decisions in life require a dichotomous Yes/No response even when we have incomplete information. In these situations, when people say sincerely say that "I don't know" they are really saying "No". In online poker, it is like letting the letting the timer on your fold/call button timeout to "fold".

Why isnt it ok to sat i dont know though, that is the point, i dont need to believe one way or the other. I can make an educated prediction based on all the information i do have, but i dont need to believe one way or the other is correct.
My journey to work every morning has two routes, on any given day one route will be quicker than the other. Every morning i ask google maps to find me the fastest route based on the local traffic.
I take the route that google says is fastest. It would be easy to say google believes that route is fastest, but google doesnt believe in things, it takes the information it has and says this is the route that should be fastest given the information available.
Google makes a decision that is impossible to ever completly know and gives out an answer without having to believe in anything, just relying on maths logic and an algorithum. Sometimes it will be wrong, mostly it will be right. Isnt this how we play poker? Assign ranges? Decide weather to merge or check behind.... We are passing incomplete info through our brain, our brain runs its own algoritum, spits out an action and our chips go in the middle or they dont.....no belief necessary....

If someone asked me if I believed in God I would say "I don't know what that is" and end the conversation right there.