>I find that the accurate term to be used here is "agnostic." Aetheists decidedly believe there is no god. Yet they have no proof of this. Theists believe there is at least one god, yet they lack any proof thereof.
>The only factually supportable position, different from all the above, is "agnostic," which is not a belief.

Your terminology is out dated. At one point, your defintion of agnostic was accurate. However, with obvious over lappings between atheism and agnosticism, something had to be changed. So we now have:
http://www.dictionary.com/cgi-bin/dict.pl?term=agnosticism&r=67

As you can see, agnostic here have their own belief, the belief that you cannot know. Meanwhile, atheism is still defined as skepticism in theism. Meaning, that the above (Aetheists decidedly believe there is no god) is inaccurate. Atheists do not believe in god, do not believe there is no god, and do not believe that you cannot know.
Would you agree with that?

>I'd like to add that I think religion has played a major positive role in the development of the human race.

I totally agree. I also think that nomadic tribes have played a major positive role in the development of the human race. Unfortunatly, humans bacame to advanced and intelligent to rely on tribal traditions, and, forutnately, we have broken away from such structures. I feel the same way about religion.