The knowledge that the earth revolves around the sun, rather than vice versa. The knowledge that weather is a natural, rather than supernatural, phenomenon. The knowledge that geological strata have been formed by natural processes over billions of years, not 4,000 yars ago in a single global deluge. No direct knowledge of God at all. Formally speaking, yes.
Agnosticism is a reasonable formal position, but IMO a useless functional position.
On has to decide whether to live as if there is a god or gods, or whether to live as if there are no gods. Atheism is an unreasonable formal position, but a useful functional position. Just as there are communities and societies of happy and sad theists. But his point is that atheism is a bankrupt philosophy to live by. I'm sure it is his point, but it is not a convincing point.