Hey, look. More evidence that the New Atheism is fizzling out like the wet broccoli fart in the intellectual community pool that it always has been.
I'll give you a moment to recover from the sheer awe of my literary skills.
Anyway, it's an interesting article. Oh, it makes the usual mistakes - unreflectively decries centuries of wrongs done by religion, mangles Aquinas with the 'Well if God created the world, who created God?' schtick, and he doesn't seem to understand just how much of the world his agnosticism slices out if his standard is a "logical justification of certainty".
But you know what? This is actually refreshing. Vox Day once said words to the effect that you could have a beer with an agnostic, while an atheist was bound to be an insufferable asshole. Well, here's more evidence for Vox's claim. Faults aside, skepticism aside, Rosenbaum is actually likable. He even refers approvingly to David Berlinski, another refreshing agnostic who was willing to throw in with the Discovery Institute for reasons I truly think added up to "Well, they balance out the other extreme".
The important difference, for me, between a true agnostic (and not a strong atheist who is camouflaging himself for debate tactics reasons) and an atheist is that you can not only have a beer with an agnostic, but a conversation. An actual conversation! You can lay out the evidences for God, you can lay out the arguments for design, and they may listen because they really are just undecided, and think that deciding with utter certainty is impossible. You can even be an agnostic theist (And really, isn't Pascal's Wager precisely addressing that possibility?)
Of course, at the end of the day I'm a theist. Admittedly a much broader theist than most (a post for another time), but I wanted to point out how refreshing it is to see this sort of agnostic pop up. It's actually close to what 'true' skepticism would look like. Naturally, the New Atheists catching wind of the article will be outraged.
But hey, that can be amusing too!