What exactly is this “philosophy of naturalism” your ranting about? Do you think scientists should just declare everything that can’t explain in the first 10 minutes of observation the result of some supernatural force and move on to something else?
If you can't understand Lewontin; you can't understand...
"We take the side of science in spite of the patent absurdity of some of its constructs, in spite of its failure to fulfill many of its extravagant promises of health and life, in spite of the tolerance of the scientific community for unsubstantiated just-so stories, because we have a prior commitment, a commitment to materialism."
"It is not that the methods and institutions of science somehow compel us to accept a material explanation of the phenomenal world, but, on the contrary, that we are forced by our a priori adherence to material causes to create an apparatus of investigation and a set of concepts that produce material explanations, no matter how counter-intuitive, no matter how mystifying to the uninitiated. Moreover, that materialism is an absolute, for we cannot allow a Divine Foot in the door." Richard Lewontin
It's the baseless assumption that scientists work on that everything has only a natural explanation.
You just demonstrated his point.
Thank you.