Would you be an atheist if science and reason wasn't supportive of atheism?

[Angrboda]

What should be stated in this thread is that human beings theist, atheist or whatever will always be irrational because it is our nature to be

Atheism isn't a position. It's refusing to believe the cliams of others. Sure, a person can become an atheist because of irrational reasons (i.e. the infamous example of people "losing their faith" because of a tragic event in their lives) but atheism is line with reason simply because it doesn't make any positive claim, it simply refuses to assume anything that hasn't been scientifically proven.

Why 'scientifically proven' ? Ignoring the difficulties with this concept, this seems to be something added, that it is a refusal to believe claims of a specific nature, but, only if those refusals are based on science or scientific reasons. I think this is a reasonably accurate summary of what many atheists consider the litmus test, but this is subsuming a lot more than "lack of belief". There's a whole epistemology here.