By Mathew Goldstein
Someone recently published this “story” (using the terminology of the web site) advocating for agnosticism and criticizing atheism on a web site I never heard of: “Sorry, but atheism doesn't automatically mean you believe and understand science”. They published my response “in defense of ontological atheism”.
At first they rejected my story on the grounds that it did not align with the purpose of the selected community. The community categories assigned to the original story I responded to was identical to the assignments of my response, the human community with a science subcategory. Having recently published an argument that agnosticism is more consistent with science than atheism, they should be willing to publish a counter-argument that atheism is consistent with science. Maybe they changed their mind about rejecting my story after recognizing that the rejection was unfair.
