Uncle Dollar Bill wrote:

... an
agnostic can either be theist or atheist.

You are confused.

Diixit, AKA Septic Capon, the Simple Pimple, is the one who is
confused. Septic Capon, the Simple Pimple, cannot tell the
difference between MIHGT and MUST.

The fact of the matter is that anyone like

you and your cohorts who believe there MIGHT be a [snip] God
[snip] is theist, not atheist.

Since agnostics all reject the Septic Capon, the Simple Pimple,
theology that he, or anyone else, KNOWS that a god is impossible,
they do NOT reject the possibility of a god, but neither they assert
it. Either asserting the existence of a god or denying the
possibility of a god are anti-agnostic, since thaty are claims of
knowledge in the abssence of supporting evidence.

In this resepect, Septic Capon, the Simple Pimple, is more of a
"theist" that the agnostics who allow that a god might be possible,
because Septic Capon, the Simple Pimple, like some theists, claims
knowledge without evidecne, a thing that agnostics abhor.

One who is agnostic is one like Thomas Huxley. He is a freethinker,
not theist, but one who denies and repudiates any [snip] doctrine
[snip] that there are propositions [snip] people ought to believe
without logically satisfactory evidence.

When Septic Capon, the Simple Pimple's propaganda is snipped out, it
is a fair representation of Huxley.

But what Septic Capon, the Simple Pimple, deliberately ignores is
that Huxley, and all agnostics, hold such rabid anti-theists as
Septic Capon, the Simple Pimple, in lower esteem than the most
rabid of theists:

The following is from Thomas Huxley's "Agnosticism: A Symposium
(1884)",

<start quote>

Consequently Agnosticism puts aside not only
the greater part of popular theology, BUT ALSO
THE GREATER PART OF ANTI-THEOLOGY.

On the whole, the "bosh" of heterodoxy is more
offensive to me than that of orthodoxy, because
heterodoxy professes to be guided by reason and
science, and orthodoxy does not.

<end quote>

Thus agnostics regard Septic Capon, the Simple Pimple, as more
offensive that any theist.

But it DOES still all come back to-> which came first the
chicken or the egg. If you belive in
the science of the "Big Bang" and not the lord god as being the
master of all living then at least
you made 1/2 of your point.