I am trying to explain the difference between 'not relying on belief' and 'believe the god doesn't exists' or 'believe ** therefore it's also a religion'. Becau

I am trying to explain the difference between 'not relying on belief' and 'believe the god doesn't exists' or 'believe ** therefore it's also a religion'. Because what op does seems to lump people to the latter. And that is what's missing critically. Because there is a clean distinction between athism(not relying on belief) and antithesim. Scientific method is a lens of analysis tool and it's beyond the framing of belief as how religious people claims, or even how antithesim people claims. Just like how I would explain the same to the some antithesim group that science doesn't prove the god don't exist. That's still a misuse of the tool of scientific method. To believe the opposite is still a belief, and missing the mark of the scientific method where the most important part is the process not the result.