Cute, but I take issue with the "Gnostic Atheist" quadrant. In my experience, while it is theoretically possible for there to be people like that, it is a non existent caricature. Even the famous Richard Dawkins stops short of such an absolutist stance. Likewise, the "Agnostic Theist" is a theoretical possibility--and I have come across one or two, but they are very rare and far and few between, and most of them tend to put themselves in the Agnostic camp.
Insofar as I'm concerned, There Are No Gods ... and until someone can come up with indisputable evidence to the contrary, that's my story and I'm sticking to it!
And you bear out my point with your "insofar as I'm concerned," we are almost all so bloody scientifically minded that we qualify just about everything (heck, I just did it twice)
You say that like it's a bad thing! [grin!]
The proof of whether or not god (or any gods) exist is in the evidence. Here is how that breaks down.
1. The sacred writings claiming to be the word of god in some way. Upon examination these writings are flawed and contain no evidence at all. They are the writings of men, and god is not trying to communicate with you.
2. The wonder and awe of the earth and the universe itself. We know very little but science is explaining more of it every day. None of it is explained by sacred writings.
If you know the above to be true, then you know that god is not trying to get in touch with you, or reveal himself to you. It would appear that god is strictly imaginary.