You misunderstand what I'm saying.
No I don't think I am misunderstanding what you are saying at all.
You make an assumption that Kylew and people like him have no evidence for their belief.
Christians for example will point to scripture as evidence and so on.
The mistake many atheists make is that you must only accept scientific evidence as valid, that is simply not the case. People accept all sorts of evidence in their daily lives and much of it is about as unscientific as it can get. Science doesn't have exclusivity of evidence.
Science actually says absolutely nothing about God, it cannot then be used as an argument against God, nor can it be used to justify God either. Science is entirely agnostic on the matter.
You need not accept their evidence, you can be ambivalent about the whole thing without feeling the need to denigrate and insult those that do not share your viewpoint, which is exactly what you are doing, whether intentionally or not I cannot say.
You say you reject the notion entirely and have no position on it, yet you judge those that do which implies that you do have a position, one that a belief in a God is both misguided and irrational. If you were ambivalent about the subject then you would not think that a belief in a God was delusional or irrational, you would have no position either way.
As I said before, do not confuse criticism of Religions with the personal Belief in God, which is what many people are apt to do.
Also People can be Scientific in their everyday lives while being Religious in their Spiritual one.
"The test of a first-rate intelligence is the ability to hold two opposed ideas in the mind at the same time, and still retain the ability to function."
F. Scott Fitzgerald
"I don't want to belong to any organisation that either forces you to wear hats, or forbids it - I'd create a new one, with one rule - hats optional". - George Carlin.
If you changed that to "I don't want to belong to any organisation that either forces you to wear uniforms, or forbids it - I'd create a new one, with one rule - uniforms optional"......does that make the Police an irrational organisation?
Joking aside, going by the opinions you have elucidated in this forum you do not have the views you profess to have, I would say your opinions are more indicative of an explicit Atheist position rather than the ambivalent agnostic-atheist one you claim to have. I can understand why you are loathe to label yourself.
I would say, going on the evidence in this thread that you are
anti-theist rather than anything else, or even
anti-cleric rather than specifically atheist per se.
