[metmom]

It’s only been in the last few decades that the standard of naturalism has been demanded from scientists.

All one has to do is look at what happens to the career at the hands of his contemporaries to a scientist who breaks in any way from the hardline, no God, random mutation, evolution standpoint. It’s professional suicide and there’s been enough examples of that lately.

So much for objectivity. No dissent allowed.

[js1138]

It’s only been in the last few decades that the standard of naturalism has been demanded from scientists.

So scientists included supernatural explanations in their research papers prior to 1988? Can you cite a few examples?

Let's look at Newton's rules of reasoning:

Rule 1: We are to admit no more causes of natural things than such as are both true and sufficient to explain their appearances.
Rule 2: Therefore to the same natural effects we must, as far as possible, assign the same causes.
Rule 3: The qualities of bodies, which admit neither intensification nor remission of degrees, and which are found to belong to all bodies within the reach of our experiments, are to be esteemed the universal qualities of all bodies whatsoever.
Rule 4: In experimental philosophy we are to look upon propositions inferred by general induction from phenomena as accurately or very nearly true, notwithstanding any contrary hypothesis that may be imagined, till such time as other phenomena occur, by which they may either be made more accurate, or liable to exceptions.

You're right. Newton cited supernatural forces as the explanation of anything not yet understood. Thank you for pointing this out.