I think this is one of the other points of contention that's coming from a lack of clear definition. Some people ake agnostic to mean "I don't know" (or possibly even "I don't know yet", some take it to mean "I CAN'T know", and some take it to mean "It's impossible for anyone to know."

The definition Eric is using is the first one. And from that definition, science is indeed agnostic about anything for which there isn't strong evidence for or against.

But I'd agree with you that using the third definition, science is not agnostic about anything.