Agnostic athiesm makes no sense

I must apologize for the delay, for I was busy with other debates.Negative/Weak/Soft Atheism is wherein a person does not believe in the existence of any deities, but does not explicitly assert there to be none.Basically, they lack both knowledge and affirmation whether God exists or not. Therefore, some atheists of this type believes that this type of atheism is the best doctrine between the arguments of religious people and the arguments of strong atheists.In my opinion, the doctrine of weak atheists is indeed a strange one, they consider all knowledge concerning reality impossible, it is essentially relativism, which holds the belief that conceptions of truth and moral values are not absolute but are relative to the persons or groups holding them. An other format for this statement is: "The truth is that the truth is relative". But then, how can this be the truth? Logically, the doctrine of weak atheism collapses itself. It assumes that humans know enough about reality, which allows us to affirm that nothing can be known about reality.The previous argument alone have everything needed to falsify weak atheism. Simply, because if they knew something about reality, it would be contradictory to claim nothing can be known about reality. It assumes knowledge about reality to disbelieve in any knowledge about reality.A non-paradoxical example is that it is not possible to know the difference between right and wrong without gaining enough knowledge to distinguish the difference between them in a proposition, therefore we can choice to agree or disagree with the proposition, but we can't conclude that it would be impossible to choose rationally. If the truth is not definitive, no statement can be compatible with the truth. Therefore an individual can not know the truth about the relative truth. That would be setting a line that stops us from passing the truth, but no one can draw boundaries before passing them and knowing what is behind them, you cannot compare between relative truth and absolute truth without knowing them both.To summarize this, saying that the truth is that there is no truth is virtual, since that statement cannot be true without existing. Everyone who knows that he is in doubt about something, knows a truth, and in this regard he knows he is certain. Therefore he is certain about a truth. Everyone who doubts if there is a truth, has a true thing of which he does not doubt. Furthermore, there is no true thing which is not true by truth. For truths are not made, they are found, therefore truths exists before they are found. Consequently whoever for whatever reason may doubt, as long as he does not doubt the existence of truth. This attitude cannot be a permanent rule for life, it could last for a period of time multiple times. Saying that someone would be born and would die under "I don't know" would be contradictory, that attitude would not last due to the nature of humans. If skepticism and misunderstanding and rejection was a comfortable state, there would be no advancement in human life. Our nature requires us to seek facts and follow it.Philosophically:Weak atheism is a non-disciplined principle that have no clear explanation for anything. It is a shallow, naive, lazy judgement on a deep and critical issue.It is a skeptic, nihilistic, sophistic, absurdist, demagogic doctrine. Science is in advancement, and it is dedicated to discover laws of the universe. Thus, weak atheism, absurdity, and similar paradoxical beliefs can never exist rationally.