Why Atheists don't believe

Hi, I just signed in today (Fate or destiny?), and I was browsing around (so much info), and stopped here. Some fascinating conclusions, I have been browsing by. Just to catch up it would take like a week or two of constant reading. I bet this topic can go on forever and ever. It would also forever and ever evolve and transform in contents until ..............
Why atheists don't beleive is still as unanswered as to why does anyone beleive? The concept of not beleiving starts with a beleif, and a beleif evolves around questionong. Aren't we all questioning?
Do we have to believe? It is impossible to be inanimated. Those chemical reactions inside of us will also cause a reaction to a stimulus. Atheists exists on the basis of of Theo. Divinity is just a rank among existence. Participating in ranks is done by choice. Having the ability to choose is a consequence of the motions of chemical reactions.There is no black and white to this dilema. Nobody is right and nobody is wrong. It all boils down to chemical reactions. What contaminates our chemical processor (the brain and it's connections)has an effect on its production. If you sprinkle some faith you get a reaction, if you sprinkle doubt, you produce another reaction. It is chain reaction what makes one animated.Maybe I am out of focus. Maybe not.
I still don't know why atheists don't beleive. I don't even know if they like pizza or if they just like to receive orders, or if they don't care at all.

They are real chemical reactions. Synapses occurs everytime the brain is stimulated. Stimulation from real circumstances (or visible ones) or stimulation from not so visible circumstances(thoughts or brainwaves from another source-like when a baby is hungry and mamas 3 hours away but her breasts start to leak, or when you sense that someone is staring at you and sure enough, you turnaround and catch the stare). Faith derives thoughts, which in turn produces brainwaves, which influence behaviour. It is the same with doubts. There is no positive or negative, just reactions. Now you might think is the right time to introduce intelligence. Thats a different avenue. I read some posts on IQ. It is all subjective. Results are what ranks these reactions. If the resulting reaction of being an atheist brings forth satisfaction, so be it. If faith works, so be it. The pleasures one takes from exercising one or another is what will drive the force for continuation or patterns of behaviour. Some might even choose to jump from one state to another and viceversa, because he or dhe feels pleasure doing so. It is a matter of choice.Choosing to react to the news of the farm is also a matter of how your brain has learned to release the chemicals necessary to go one way or another, or even being innert. Knowing GOD , not Knowing GOD, Beleiving or not is relevant to what satisfaction you expect to acheive. You can use observation to make predispose a reaction. Lets say you see someone stick his hand in a fire, and he screams and you see his hand's skin get red and charcoaled. How do you conclude this is good or bad. The scream, the redness, the change of color? It all relates to the stimuli you have experienced befor. Maybe the scream reminds your brain of something that did not produce satisfaction in you and caused you te react the same (with a scream). Maybe you observed your skin get red when you where bitten by a insect and you recognize this is not something you wish to experience. It is the same with beleifs. You might choose to accept others experience as something that might save you the trouble of discerning among your own experience. Is this stupid. In no way. I would not stick my hand in the fire to see if it is true that it burns. I would jump off a cliff to see if gravity is as they say it is.