[Physicist]

Let me tell you this does not play well out here in suburbia.

"Suburbia" doesn't split the same hairs you do. Somewhere there may be a few recovering agnostics who were duped into faithlessness by a too-great reliance on Weinberg's infallibility on matters of theology--and boy, are they irate--but it's not a large demographic.

As for the second part, I say Aristotle was a wonderful guy but if I understand current philosophy of science correctly, unless you can measure the notion of "will" in regards to falling things, it is not science.

But if I call his notion unnecessary, will you cry foul?

[Varda]

I actually knew someone who became an agnostic (maybe even atheist) because the science didn't match up to his vision of theology. Like Darwin, he believed Christianity meant Biblical Literalism. Once the evidence was in that literalism wasn't supported by the evidence, he simply dropped the religion part all together.

If you call his notion unnecessary, I will not only not cry foul, I will call it... gravity.