As a scientist, one must keep an open mind to all possibilities no matter how remote. I think this justifies agnosticism even though one can go with certainty (until other evidence arrives) for atheism.

"Skepticism is my nature.
Free Thought is my methodology.
Agnosticism is my conclusion.
Atheism is my opinion.
Humanitarianism is my motivation." ~ Jerry Dewitt, former pastor of two evangelical churches, American author and public speaker, and a prominent member of the American atheism movement.

Don’t worry about labels. You can also be both atheist and agnostic. I considered myself both because I don’t know if god exist (agnostic) and I don’t believe god exists (atheist).

As far as the scale & Dawkins, I don’t really care about any of that.

I'm an 8. There isn't even the slightest chance that an intelligence is somehow responsible the universe we inhabit. Without matter there can be no intelligence, just as you can't think without a brain. The idea that thought is something than can exist on its own makes no sense. You could say that we can't be 100% sure that the world doesn't rest on an elephant that stands on a turtle, but it's playing with words.

I am an atheist because I 100% absolutely do not believe in any gods of any kind.
I am also an agnostic because I acknowledge that I do not have access to all of the knowledge of the universe, or universes.

It's pretty simple. Either you believe in a god or you don't. Even though I don't absolutely dismiss the remote idea that there could be some decision making power/entity/force in existence, I do not believe it to be true. Therefore, I am an agnostic atheist. I am also an anti-theist, because I think that belief in god(s) does more harm than good. You can lack a belief in any gods without actively believing that there are no gods. These are two different beliefs.

While I respect Dawkins, I don't fall into lock-step with everything he, or anyone else,
has to say about anything.

Personally, the scale reminds me entirely too much of the whole "how good of a christian are you?" thing.
I'm not about to start quantifying, or qualifying, my atheism, for anyone.

You don't have to call yourself anything, if you don't want to.
You can reject anyone else's labels for you.
That is your right.
You do you.

I agree with Hastur. I find that people on both sides can get caught up with labels. It’s OK to believe. It’s OK to not believe. It’s OK to question. It’s OK to change your mind as you evolve and learn. You are who you are, and how you think is unique to you. I say pshaw to the 7-point scale. It’s a fabrication of one man’s mind.

Evolution VS The Bible. Occam's Razor.... There!

While I certainly believe there is more intelligent life in the universe other than that on Earth. I seriously doubt that any superior life forms are anywhere nearby. None would be considered a "higher power" in my mind.

I love your line about, "even if there was you wouldn't worship it." I feel the same way!

If any part of a story can be proven untrue then the whole story that is based on that untruth can be considered to be false. Say you believe in science and facts if you have to say anything

someone who does not believe in christianity isn't necessarily an atheist or an agnostic. such a person is called a nonchristian. people of all the other religions other than christianity fit into that category lol. not believing there are any gods and believing there are no other gods is not exactly the same thing but it's close enough. maybe isaac asimov's explanation will help you:

“I am an atheist, out and out. It took me a long time to say it. I've been an atheist for years and years, but somehow I felt it was intellectually unrespectable to say one was an atheist, because it assumed knowledge that one didn't have. Somehow, it was better to say one was a humanist or an agnostic. I finally decided that I'm a creature of emotion as well as of reason. Emotionally, I am an atheist. I don't have the evidence to prove that God doesn't exist, but I so strongly suspect he doesn't that I don't want to waste my time.”

meanwhile, i can add to that: you have no more proof that there is no tooth fairy than that there is no god, whether a christian god or zeus. i don't see the point of reserving judgment for the unlikely appearance of one of those so i also don't see the point of reserving judgment regarding the god of the covenant, or any other modern god. it's such a silly concept. people can come up with any old thing and i don't have to reserve judgment in case it's true. i'd be pretty gullible and an easy mark if i did.

g

With all due respect to Dawkins, I don't place him as all knowing.

I'm a 6.5 on the Dawkins Scale

I am an agnostic - anti-theist.

I'm with Penn Jillette on this:
Agnostic and atheist answer two different questions:
We cannot know fur shur how our universe started: agnostic (without knowledge)
There ain't no all-powerful invisible critters fucking with humans on the earth: atheist (there is no reliable proof of such beings)

And I agree with Sam Harris, and Christopher Hitchens,... I am an anti-theist because I oppose religionists imposing their mental illness on all us good folks.

FYI: "atheist" is a word created by theists to describe those not in the tribe.

I call myself Antje ( always followed by how to spell it) or Oma ( grandmother). The only time atheist comes up if somebody inquires directly about the state of my religious being. I say: " I am an atheist " and smile confidently. Did that yesterday when two old ( older than me) gentlemen, set up in front of Walmart with their Gideon bibles. I could tell, they were professional missionaries because they did not even flinch. I said,"no, thank you, and good luck with your project " and walked to my car.

I'm a 6.999999...only because I reject the notion that I can "know" anything with 100% certainty.

"I don't know what I don't know"

I would believe what Richard Dawkins and other scientists say, I believe theres no chance of any gods exist, the history pretty much sums it up, the suffering of mankind, including growing old, and dying, illnesses, like cancer and others, the horrors of wars, the holocaust, the history of the earth, including evolution, astronomy, expert investigation of the bible and religion, proving it wrong and non existent, experts like Richard Dawkins, Carl Sagan, Richard Carrier, Dan Barker, Stephen Hawking Albert Einstein,

Do you require a label.
It should be easy to just say, I don't believe.
You don't have to say I don't believe your BS because I'm athiest.

I have an immense amount of respect for Richard Dawkins, both for his science and for his public stance on religion, but I don't think belief is "scaleable." Also like you and Dawkins, I don't think there is any evidence to support the "God" claim.

I'm a "weak atheist" on Dawkins' scale. I don't believe in any god or think it probable to exist but I don't go to the extreme of saying one or more absolutely don't exist. That's just rational. So I'm a 6/6.5. I think it's just as arrogant to say some definitely doesn't exist as it is to say it definitely does when there it's no evidence either way.

My idea of atheism is simply based on the opinion that I reject the idea of God as an entity concept especially a sentient one. I can only decline the theories that exist, so till someone has some new findings to present, I shall wait to be proven wrong factually.

I still like using the philosophical agnostic and practical atheist saying. Because of using the terminology, I would put myself as a 6.9999... on the Dawkins scale.

After reading the answers on here, I am not sure you have any better answer than you had before. So, I will throw my two cents in. I often consider myself a “realist” as much as an Atheist. Which means that I don’t spend a lot of time worrying about what I can’t prove, can’t see and doesn’t have any bearing on my life. Whether a “god” exists or not, I have seen no indication of it, it has no effect on my life, I have no fear of death because it is inevitable regardless of what you believe. Nobody has yet taken a picture of billions of humans who have died running around in heaven or hell. No pictures of winged people flying around protecting people. In wartime, most people on both sides pray, they die randomly anyway, not based on how many times they attended church or temple or mosque.
If you are going to question that which is not seen and unprovable, what is your take on extraterrestrials? There are far more sightings, testimonials, and archeological evidence they exist or existed than what is available for proving a god. Or ghosts? Many people can testify they have experienced them. Where do you draw the line of what to believe and what not? By the numbers of people who favor that belief. The Abrahamic religions, taken as a group, certainly have the numbers. But some of that is due to the fact that they were great at killing off the competition!

While it's been awhile since I read it , I don't remember any dinarours in Genisus . It does not say that there were or were not dinarours . It just says he created the earth , then the animals , and humans were last . Are you making an assummption ?

The problem with the scale is that it preconceives a position, and therefore offers you a set of parameters that are only relevant to a defined outcome.

For example, it doesn’t cater for don’t know, don’t care. There doesn’t seem to be an explanatory indication as to what God may, or may not, be.

It’s a bit like a pop quiz in the form of a Likeart scale for “How do you rate Paul McCartney as a bass player”

This is fine for collecting data, but to encompass all your corespondents the parameters and definitions need to be clear, or the subjects will respond to the closest, rather than the appropriate, category and so skew the result.

Call yourself George or Eric. You can call yourself what you like and if your philosophy doesn’t fall into a category even better.

Better to be a club of one than sharing a badge with a dozen of others who don’t know who they are.

I don’t know Dawkins 7 point scale but I shall look it up.

Until there is credible evidence to the contrary, I am a skeptic & an atheist (definitely not an agnostic). An agnostic is just an atheist in a tall hat.
Dawkins scale is just an indicator of people's different perspective & position on their conviction regarding the subject.