Agnosticism vs Atheism and Religions

[mhss1992]

Originally Posted by Reach

Concepts without falsifiability have no scientific utility. Science and logic have limitations, but those limitations reject hypotheses that cannot be falsified. ... Until then, however, I request evidence based arguments before I seriously consider something as plausible.

You know... This bugs me a little.
I believe that facts remain true regardless of their utility to humanity, science or whatever.

I am by no means trying to hinder science's progress by forcing scientists to always think "the results of this experiment are a strong evidence to 'X theory', but God is still an option". That's absolutely useless (though pretty harmless).

It's just that possibilities are out there. There are certain things that will never (or at least as long as we are alive) have any form of evidence, like different kinds of matter and universes, but that is not an excuse to take a negative position regarding their existence. The answer is just "I don't know". It's that simple. The fact that they're not important to us does not change that answer. This thread is actually just a complaint against the arrogant people who think they know too much, and I've seen far too many of those.