Agnostics are not Atheists and they deserve their own forum.

[ElboRuum]

72. Tripe.

Atheism is the simple and rationally supported idea that no evidence exists to merit a belief in deities.

This is not a "belief system" as our agnostic friends might and this article does claim.

This article has made the rather bold intimation that "the jury is still out on god" so the only rational point of view is agnosticism. Atheists, rightly, make the corollary claim "what jury?". By this reasoning, the jury must be out on other things too, like the Flying Spaghetti Monster, the Loch Ness Monster, yetis, Bigfoot, and Space Aliens in the Bermuda Triangle.

In short, atheists put forth the very legitimate idea that an absence of evidence is in and of itself evidence of absence.

Agnostics seem to want to play with the idea of "not knowing therefore unknown". Following such reasoning permits anything, no matter how improbable, to be deemed possible. How is this position a rational one?