DarkBronzePlant

Oh Christ, we went through the hell of splitting the agnostic/atheist hair awhile ago. I'm staying out of it this time.

Koyaanisqatsi

Of course not. It is not possible to prove that something does not exist. No offense, but this is Logic 101.

That's why such a question is nonsense and should never be asked.

There is only one legitimate question in regard to theism, which is, "Do you have any evidence that the creature you are asserting is factual exists?"

For anyone to attempt to turn that around and ask, "Do you have any evidence that the creature I am asserting is factual does not exist," commits the fallacy of proving a negative, which can not be done.

By the way, a fallacy means that it is never to be argued again. Once something is established as fallacious, that is when it is discarded as no longer valid, never to be posted again.

Unfortunately, most cult members have no such mechanism of understanding and continue to post invalid arguments over and over and over again, but that's neither here nor there. Just a pet peeve of mine.

Then you know that you have no belief in deity. That's what it means to state "I consider myself an atheist," by the way.

Technically, it is the absence of belief in deity. "God" is a general term and can be applied to literally thousands of mythological creatures.

Agnostic means "without knowledge." They are therefore "free" to still believe, which is what separates an agnostic from an atheist.

Atheist: without belief in deity.
Agnostic: without knowledge of deity.

It's a square/rectangle thing. An atheist is an agnostic, but an agnostic is not necessarily an atheist.

Again, the distinction is in the word "believe."

Atheist (whether "weak" or "strong") are without belief, therefore, an atheist of any nature cannot be one who believes anything at all regarding fictional creatures.

Fictional creatures do not factually exist. There is no question about it and therefore no need to rely on "belief" to qualify one's position.

I question this only because you are qualifying your statement with the uncertainty of implicit in the word "believe," which would make you more of an agnostic, IMO.

An atheist would simply state: Fictional characters do not factually exist.

Tautology. Agnostic means "without knowledge," which implies that they have not been shown evidence to conclude anything one way or another (i.e., the qualifying uncertainty implicit in the word "believe" is still in place until further notice).

It's the theological equivalent of being Switzerland.

I hope that is clear now. "Belief" does not enter into an atheist's vocabulary in this regard, for it implies a state of uncertainty that is not warranted.

Fictional characters do not factually exist. Period.

Not at all; just hard to decipher.