https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/atheism
Definition of atheism
: a lack of belief or a strong disbelief in the existence of a god or any gods:
a philosophical or religious position characterized by disbelief in the existence of a god or any gods
On the other hand agnosticism says:
“Agnosticism may mean no more than the suspension of judgment on ultimate questions because of insufficient evidence, or it may constitute a rejection of traditional Christian tenets.”
The definition is very clear, disbelief in god! evidence of otherwise an atheist is a materialist. If you do not fall under the category then:
Why not call yourself a agnostic then? if you are not sure there is no god, then you are by definition a agnostic person. Richard dawkins says he 6.9/7 certain there is no god, so he is "almost certain" there is no god, from my understand of your posts you are the same, so you do not qualify under your definition, how can you be "sure" that god didnt create us? if you say there is no evidence but i can't be sure, i understand but you are saying materialism all that exists and nothing exists outside of material world is a position of pure faith. Hence you exactly fall under the definition sagans atheism.
The quotes are not wrong, read up on Sagan mate, he clearly said he doesn't believe in a god depending how you define god.
From Washington times:
I e-mailed the person who would know Sagan’s views better than anyone: Ann Druyan, Sagan’s widow. I specifically asked her about the quote in my 1996 story (“An atheist has to know a lot more than I know. An atheist is someone who knows there is no God”). Druyan responded:
“Carl meant exactly what he said. He used words with great care.He did not know if there was a god. It is my understanding that to be an atheist is to take the position that it is known that there is no god or equivalent. Carl was comfortable with the label ‘agnostic’ but not ‘atheist.'”
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...did-he-believe-part-1/?utm_term=.16902c8db0a1
You are saying a great scientist is wrong and you know more about this than him! well ok then, i dont think anything else needs to be said.
But going back to gods
Einsteins god is extremely plausible, he had the deepest respect for hindu cosmology based on the spirituality, there are youtube videos of him acknowledging it.
Right, so consciousness itself is not an evidence? how about the universe itself? So 14 billion years ago there was nothing and now here we are, just by accident and that requires no belief. Accident!