Seems like a lot of confusion on this topic is brought about by two different ways of saying the same thing. I’ve illustrated this before, but once more can’t hurt.

One common idea of what separates atheism from theism is a linear scale:
Atheist - Agnostic - Theist

The idea being that atheism is a positive rejection of all gods (as in “I believe there are no gods”), and agnostic something from a passive rejection (“I do not believe there are gods”) to some sort of deist “maybe” or just “who cares”.

Another way to look at it is much more common among self-professed atheists - instead of using a linear scale, we visualize it as two intersecting axes.
Atheist - Theist on one axis, and Gnostic - Agnostic on the other axis.

Illustrated nicely here.

The point of this is to clarify the “strong” and “weak” positions of both atheism and theism. It is an important distinction to make.
I would agree that the statement “I believe there are no gods” is logically tenuous (it’s an assertion of certainty over an unprovable matter). The statement “I do not believe there are any gods” is not. That is called “weak atheism”, or “passive atheism” - or by the linear system mentioned earlier, to great confusion, “agnosticism”.

I’d also make the point that the logically problematic “strong theism” group is far more populous than the “strong atheism” one.

_{In absolute numbers. Relative to populations would be tricky, since we’d have to discuss “implicit atheism” and its relevance.}