Why do people deny the existence of a GOD! When scientific methods (favorite quote of atheists) would say there must be one?

The only people who say - there must be one - are mental midgets.

Yes, there is a god - but ALL religions are false.

The fact that you asked this question is hard scientific evidence that there is no God.

Quantitatively -- Other people have posted similar questions to yours, which further proves there is no God.

Therefore, in terms of logic, someone can be agnostic, but they're still an atheist -- unless they're an agnostic theist.

No, there is nothing of the scientific method in any part of your question.  "By math the number of accounts....", is an argument from popularity and could be applied to all gods, goddesses, the number of children that believe in Santa, etc... etc...

In all cases where claims made about a god or gods that would have left lasting, unmistakable, and/or undeniable evidence that would suggest a god or gods, there not only is no evidence but often there is evidence suggesting completely natural processes.

There simply is absolutely no reason to remotely suspect the existence of anything like a god or that "supernatural" might exist.  There certainly is no suggestion or reason to suspect that a god might be needed to explain anything.

If scientific method would say there is a god, why doesn't it.

There are multiple accounts of hundreds and hundreds of different gods. So by your logic there are more than one god. However the nature of those gods and the encounters are inconstant and contradictory.

On the other hands there are just many, of not more accounts of people asking for intervention by a god, any god, and nothing happening. Those accounts of nothing are just as valid. And unlike the accounts of god, the accounts of no god are consistent and not contradictory.

I will go for consistency non contradictory accounts every time.

"By math the number of accounts, over time wins in terms of observed experimental bias, duration and quantity "

What experiments?

"Qualitatively -- The acceptance of a God is true"

What qualities?

"Therefore in terms of logic wouldn't an agnostic be the most scientifically viable rather than atheism?"

I think every honest person is an agnostic. Because if there's a way to know any gods exist, I haven't seen them. But everyone's still either a believer or a nonbeliever. A theist or an atheist.

More likely God if everything is taken into account. 

For years, I didn't know,  didn't care.  Also didn't know my peril in life!

It's called darkness. 

Then, I was saved.

I can't see any point otherwise. 

"Does it mean, if you don’t understand something, and the community of physicists don’t understand it, that means God did it? Is that how you want to play this game? Because if it is, here’s a list of things in the past that the physicists at the time didn't understand [and now we do understand.] If that’s how you want to invoke your evidence for God, then God is an ever-receding pocket of scientific ignorance that’s getting smaller and smaller and smaller as time moves on - so just be ready for that to happen, if that’s how you want to come at the problem." Neil deGrasse Tyson

-If the Universe needs a creator, why doesn't god?

If god doesn't need a creator, why does the Universe ?-

Checkmate, sparky.

To me, it would seem so.