It takes a profound hypocrisy to try to reconcile for others things that you can't reconcile for yourself.

If you can't think of an observation that could disprove a theory, that theory simply isn't scientific.

All scientific progress requires a climate of strong skepticism.

Science has only two things to contribute to religion: an analysis of the evolutionary, cultural, and psychological basis for believing things that aren't true, and a scientific disproof of some of faith's claims (e.g., Adam and Eve, the Great Flood). Religion has nothing to contribute to science, and science is best off staying as far away from faith as possible. The "constructive dialogue" between science and faith is, in reality, a destructive monologue, with science making all the good points, tearing down religion in the process.

We are the one creature to whom natural selection has bequeathed a brain complex enough to comprehend the laws that govern the universe. And we should be proud that we are the only species that has figured how we came to be.

Come on, readers, give me one example of a question that religion has answered to everyone's satisfaction - one example of a "truth" found in religion's quest for truth.

Now, science cannot completely exclude the possibility of supernatural explanation. It is possible though very unlikely that our whole world is controlled by elves. But supernatural explanations like these are simply never needed; we manage to understand the natural world just fine using reason and materialism.