Is atheism a belief?

[The Grand Nudger]

That's because you're a nutter.  Atheism is simple.  It's not a set of ideologies, or an ideology itself.  Do you believe in gods?  No?  Bingo, atheist.

LoL u have to be a bit of a nutter to be thinking about this stuff don't u reckon. LoL. 
The definition of atheism is as simple as u put it. I understand that.
What I was saying is that thousands of years ago, in the orient, it was atheism that gave rise to these religions/philosophies/ doctrines.

What you're saying is a lazy and factually inaccurate appraisal of the origins of eastern religious traditions.  

'New' as in at least 134 years old. Catch up, dude.

As I was saying, atheism has been the basis of eastern religions for 2,500 years.
In contrast 134 years is a "New" concept in the west. 

Atheism has been around in the west since at least the 5th century BCE, and by this I mean atheism is on record by the 5th century BCE...there have always been people, everywhere, who thought that this god shit was a bunch of nonsense.  

Family seems to be a serious priority for us now?

What is your priority for society?

Rephrase?

Sucks, I guess?

Its just small nuances in semantics.
I have no prob with the definition of atheism, I even said it on page 2 or 3 of this thread. I can see how the theists would drill this topic so i just wanted to leave it alone.
That website i linked is really good. I could copy and paste its definition of atheism but it ultimately just boils down to the disbelief in a god like u said.

I noticed its usually the Christian God thats taken into context.

Because most western atheists either used to be or were raised by christians.  

 But atheism extends to any kind of intelligent design right? Extraterrestrial or even something unthought of by humans?

No.  Atheism is only a comment on gods.  You familiar with the ancient alien nutters?  You can be an ancient alien nutter and also an atheist.

But my confusion is the differing views of agnosticism and atheism.
I often get told that my position is false, bullshit or whatever.
Remember i was bought up by catholics, became an atheist. Thats when I really rejected the notion of God or religion and am now agnostic.

Its been such a complex journey thats taken till now age 41 and will probably change when im 50 and 60. People can label me what ever they wish.
I know where I stand. I can answer any questions. And Im not fixed on one theory.

The terms atheist and agnostic aren't fixed on any particular theory or god, either.  

LoL do u ever think back to when u wer 20? I do. So naive at that age. Now at 40 I look back wen I was 30 and shake my head.
Perhaps wen im 60 ill look back in absolute disgrace with the knowledge I may have then.

I do, often.  I'm certainly not happy with some of the decisions I made, but that's to be expected....and I'm not sure what that has to do with atheism or agnosticism?   

I definately understand how most atheists are agnostic and how people can be agnostic theists. Its in the diagrom on my op.
But when I say Im pure agnostic some people cannot compute. They try pull me either way.

I posted that definition of agnosticism cos its me. My agnosticism not attached to atheism or theism in any way in terms of God.
In fact im skeptical of both and put the onus of proof on them to provide their claim to me.

Do you believe in gods?  If the answer is "I'm agnostic" in some way not contained by agnostic atheism or agnostic theism (you could use deism as well).....you're just telling us that you don't know the contents of your own beliefs.  

Generally speaking, people who are skeptical of gods do not believe in gods.  It doesn't matter whether or not you're also skeptical of some other thing or don't believe in some other thing.  If your skepticism amounts to you not believing in gods, then you're an atheist, no matter whatever else you don;t or do believe in, and regardless of whether or not you know some x..the subject of gnosis, the root of agnostic and gnostic.

This is the definition of the fallacy known as appeal to ignorance.

That's nice, and?  You still didn't correctly identify any argument from ignorance in your comments, so?  

But aside from the fallacy try put on my shoes, the agnostic. I feel like a judge. I see theists and atheists arguing eachother. And I know both arguments well.

I strongly doubt that this statement is true, on account of my experience with you (and your interactions with others) on these boards thusfar.  

The theists admit that their view is based on faith.

They do not.  The ones we get are certain that they can prove this or that, and that evidence backs up this and that.

Ancient texts, written thousands of years ago, the bilble written by man, not God. Ok

We've got one right now who thinks that genesis is his gods literal testimony.

Now the atheist steps up and I ask "whats your evidence for ruling out the possibility of some form of intelligent design or even just the Christian God?"

and you either get it, or a person tells you that they just don;t believe.

And I get this fallacy. Now, I don't wish to have a debate on this cos it will just go round in circles. Either u agree its a fallacy or not. No big deal. Move on.

LOL..... You go no such thing, lol.  I can see why you would want to just reassert that dumb shit and then indicate that you don;t want to talk about it anymore.  Too bad.  

But check this Bolga. Im more interested in early man, atheism and theism, onto civilization.

Again..not in my experience, you're not.  

Would you agree that all religion was spawned from atheism? That 200,000 years ago the first Homo Sapiens were atheist?
That we are born innatly atheist and apolitical? That religion is most likely a reponse to atheism?

Why would any thinking fucking person agree to the absurd thing that you just said?