http://science.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=6579503&cid=48702993

It's not true that science can't prove that a god or gods exist - it's more that a god which can't be proven to exist is a god that does absolutely nothing (if it did anything then that would leave some evidence which could be userd to prove its existence) - and is therefore a god that may as well not exist, as is exactly the same as a god that doesn't exist.

A faith-only god is irrelevant - pointless.

Anyone who believes in a creator god that made us into rational beings and then demands that we ignore our rationality and use only faith to believe in it - because it refuses to provide evidence of itself - is a fuckwit.

http://science.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=6579503&cid=48702989

Agnosticism alone is only about the contention that the existence of gods is unknowable and says nothing about the belief of the person.

The real categories IMNSHO:

* Gnostic Theist: I believe in god(s) existence and I know god(s) existence are knowable.

* Gnostic Atheist: God(s) non existence is demonstrable (and logically do not believe in gods existence)

* Agnostic Theist: I believe in god(s) existence but god(s) existence cannot ever be demonstrated, i.e. it is faith only, all the miracles and so forth is bullshit.

* Agnostic Atheist: God(s) is a construction of a human mind, but this cannot ever be demonstrated to the point of knowing that god(s) does not exists.

In the very end if you shrug and say I do not know, but live your life without any token prayer, then you are de facto agnostic atheist. There are a few agnostic theist I met, they are quite rare, the vast majority of self declared "agnostic" I met, are actually agnostic atheist, but unwilling to admit the atheist part to themselves.

IMSID1BD4D376B5C82408BD4F6A2FCAFE240C41F779A7