[BATTSON@id.ucsb.edu: Stasis and Agnostic Science]

John W. Burgeson (73531.1501@compuserve.com)
07 Nov 95 19:41:03 EST

Art wrote an argument that scientists ought to be
agnostics, rather than atheistis, in their scientific methodology.

Much of my earlier reply to David Tyler argued against this.

>>The bottom line is that a truly agnostic science allows the empirical
possibility of intelligent design (including fabrication). And that is all we
need to ask for. How could anyone rationally argue against such a request?
>>

If my reply on this to David is not rational, it is my poor choice of
wording and argumentation; others have said it better than I.

Burgy