Image via Wikipedia
As a scientist and a former believer, I see this as bunk. Science and faith are fundamentally incompatible, and for precisely the same reason that irrationality and rationality are incompatible. They are different forms of inquiry, with only one, science, equipped to find real truth. And while they may have a dialogue, it’s not a constructive one. Science helps religion only by disproving its claims, while religion has nothing to add to science. -- Jerry Coyne, 2010, ardent darwinist and atheist, quoted here.Science uses methodological naturalism, which means that it looks for natural explanations for natural phenomenon. When it looks for natural explanations for un-natural phenomenon, it is the wrong tool doing the wrong task. When it denies that supra-natural phenomenon exist, it goes beyond the bounds of legitimate scientific inquiry into unscientific metaphysical assumptions. Therefore, Coyne, in stating science as the ultimate and all-sufficient epistemological tool, presupposes that the sum total of reality is naturalistic. Problem is, this is a philosophical assumption, not a scientific one.
So, if reality consists of more than the merely material, this makes science not a search for truth, but a search for ultimately false explanations. As someone said, "if the only tool in your toolkit is a hammer, the whole world looks like a nail".
And that is the problem with science wedded to atheism.