I am an atheist, by the second descriptor of the definition provided: one who disbelieves in gods. That is not the same as denial. I just see no reason to accept their existence as true with the current lack of evidence.
I didn't vote on the second aspect: whether science is compatible with religion. Reason being, it depends what you mean by "science."
If you are going to be a scientist, I think you must always be open to reconsidering your beliefs in light of the evidence. But you could still be an agnostic theist and be a scientist, under that mode of thinking.
However, individual scientific concepts never completely disprove deities, at least not at this point. For example, while evolution does disprove the "seven days" creation myth, it does not necessarily rule out the possibility of a god planting the seed of life so that evolution could take hold. Abiogenesis is the field of scientific study dedicated to figuring out how life started, but as of now, there is no theory that has overwhelming evidence and support, so there is no reason why believing a god planted life is incompatible with evolution.
I personally think that defaulting to believing "god did it" is a bit silly, since there is no evidence of that either. But science cannot currently exclude it, therefore it is not mutually exclusive with science.