It is a choice to have a disbelief rather than a belief. But to say you don't have a belief is false.
Your conclusions about the world around you are then seen through the prism of what you have chosen to believe, and therefore will read and listen to those that also see through the chosen prism of belief, even though many different beliefs are looking at the same things.
To then claim truth in disbelief through the process of occam's razor with merely the same things that everyone is also observing is a falsehood, as the assumptions made rely on a foundation of lessons taught in the unprovable, unseeable beliefs in the same way other beliefs operate.
If we all have the same evidence of that which we can see, but no proof of how it came to be, our conclusions are then simply based on what we chose to believe before the evidence was presented. A faith in which our conclusion about what is unknown is correct.
To choose to disbelieve about a belief is still a chosen belief in disbelieving.
That's ridiculous. Abstaining from believing is not the same thing as believing. If you have a math problem: 56 + 87 = ? And you answer it's 143 and another guy answers 140 and I haven't answered yet, it's not all the same thing. Two have answered, and one hasn't.
Atheists recognize that they don't know the answer to the question of creation.
no, they lack a belief in a deity.
Lacking belief in something is not the same as believing against it.
Instead of playing libtard word games, do a little reading.
There are gnostic atheists, they claim to know they're is no God. Considering there is no objective proof of a God (learn what subjective and objective mean) this isn't unreasonable, but absolutes are pretty fucking stupid.
There are agnostic atheists, no belief in a deity but no absolute claim because nobody can know.
There are agnostic theists, they believe in a deity but don't claim to know anything for certain.
There are gnostic theists who believe and "know" there is a God.
Words have meaning, don't be a leftist.
Think you are confusing Atheists with Agnostics.
No, my post is correct.
An atheist does not believe in God, but they don't have a set of beliefs that explains why we exist. Therefore they abstain from explaining how/ why we are here, however they say that it's definitely not God.
Atheism is not believing in God. Agnostic is not knowing if you believe in God or not.
No, I'm not talking about why number theory works the way it does. I'm asking the question, where does math come from? I am not denying the observable.
But your other beliefs to that question stem from your choice of unbelief, which still leads to answers that are just as valid as having a different belief, as they all are unprovable.