I find it bizarre that you call yourself a "gnostic atheist" and then proceed to tell people off about not even considering being wrong. A gnostic atheist by definition is one who "knows" there is no God, or at least holds Gods to be provably non-existant. To me, being a gnostic atheist brings a certain degree of faith into the whole argument, because I cannot see any way someone could say they could prove there is no God. There are several ways to prove there is a God, yet none of them have ever been demonstrated, but that doesn't mean that a God doesn't exist somewhere.
If you are a gnostic atheist, you don't consider being wrong, so perhaps you are using a different definition?
If you are a gnostic atheist, you don't consider being wrong, so perhaps you are using a different definition?
