Abstract
I fear that Randy Isaac, "From Gaps to God" (PSCF 57, no. 3 [Sept 2005]: 230-3), condenses his introduction too much, for he appears to shortchange some areas of natural knowledge and to oversimplify the applicable categories. While it is legitimate to focus on the sciences, he passes too quickly to them as if they form the whole of natural knowledge. However, historical studies seem to be as natural as anthropology, psychology and sociology. Aborigines, though without science in their tribal condition, appear to have a great deal of accurate information about the plants and animals in their environment. Another area that may be included is the foundation of science, like the claim that the universe is understandable. Surely the foundation of empirical knowledge is also knowledge, although it cannot be demonstrated empirically.