There are sincere believers who interpret Genesis 1 and 2 in a very literal way that is inconsistent, frankly, with our knowledge of the universe's age or of how living organisms are related to each other.

Physicists have come up with other explanations. One is to say that these six constants are not free to vary. Some unified theory will eventually show that they are as locked in as the circumference and the diameter of a circle. That reduces the odds of them all independently just happening to fit the bill.

Faith is not the opposite of reason.

Compassionate doctors sometimes lie to patients about the severity of their condition, and it is not always wrong to do so.

Faith is belief without evidence and reason; coincidentally that's also the definition of delusion.

Gould carried the art of bending over backward to positively supine lengths. Why shouldn't we comment on God, as scientists? ... A universe with a creative superintendent would be a very different kind of universe from one without. Why is that not a scientific matter?

I have a strong feeling that the subject of evolution is beautiful without the excuse of creationists needing to be bashed.