Is atheism a belief?

[EgoDeath]

Right, you take it as axiomatic that evidence is only scientific evidence. This is a strong belief that you have.

You choosing to call this a belief doesn't make it a belief no matter how many times you repeat it. This is how the entire world of science works, i.e. how the world works, this isn't some personal thing I came up with. Science is responsible for almost everything around you in one way or another. The scientific method is, so far, the best way we have of understanding the world around us. I don't "believe in" the scientific method, I accept it as fact, because it is.

The word "belief" implies that there is faith involved, which there isn't.

I don't think you were trying to avoid answering the question. I think you didn't understand my question, due to the fact that you consider the answer self-evident.

You never asked if I was talking about scientific evidence. It wasn't a matter of me "misunderstanding" anything.

It's certainly true that if we begin with the axiom that only scientific evidence is good, then there is no evidence for the existence of god. 

What other types of evidence are "good?" What other types of evidence would be on par with scientific evidence to prove the existence of god?

As for how we are defining god, there are many definitions given over the millennia. I offered one, and you claimed that I had said nothing. That seemed odd to me. There are definitions. Again, you may be taking it as axiomatic that they are not good definitions. Or you may be unaware of them. 

You never produced a definition for god.

Please read that sentence carefully. It says that religious people hold those things to be good evidence. It does not say that I agree with them. 

And yet, you suggest them as a possible alternative to scientific evidence, implying that those things could be just as good as scientific evidence to some people. The point you're missing over and over and over again is it does not matter what one person thinks in their head is good evidence, it's about a community as a whole coming together and deciding what is verified through repeated observation and experiment. Facts are facts, whether or not you call them beliefs.

This isn't my "personal belief" about evidence, this is how the world works by-and-large.

The point I am making is that YOU have a belief about what constitutes good evidence. You apparently have reasons for believing this. (Unless you want to assert that you believe it for no reason.) 

Calling something a belief doesn't make it a belief, no matter how many times you repeat it or how you try to twist it.

So you are making a positive claim. You are claiming that only one type of evidence is good. And if you are making a positive claim, this is something which you need to defend to people who disagree with you. 
Therefore, a key element on which your lack of belief in god rests is a positive assertion requiring defense.

And yet, I still don't need to defend the scientific method, which is what you ARE asking me to do, regardless of how you try to filter it through the false narrative of it being "my belief."

So it may be true that your atheism is only a lack, but it is a lack resting in a web of beliefs concerning what constitutes good evidence. And if that web of beliefs were to go away, your atheism might well go with it.

So, once again, this is just a round-about way of trying to call atheism a belief, which is some strange obsession you have.

---

You're really trying to walk me down here and I won't let it happen. Your incessant need to define atheism as a belief is an inevitable attempt to claim that atheism requires faith, which it doesn't not. So if that's the point you're trying to get to, let's just cut the bullshit.