Edge.com hosts their responses to the question, “Does the empirical nature of science contradict the revelatory nature of faith?”

Answers by interesting writers, like Daniel Dennett and Sam Harris are worth reading, too.

On the Pharyngula blog today, PZ Myers (associate professor of Biology and outspoken atheist) has some interesting comments related to this subject.

Roger Ebert (yeah, that one – the movie guy) has written a couple of excellent articles defending evolution against creationism. One of those appeared on Darwin Day (Feb 12, if you didn’t know — 200 years since Darwin’s birth, and 150 years since he put forth the theory of evolution). Myers mostly liked the article, but when Ebert briefly put forth a “science and religion don’t overlap” argument, Myers disagreed.

I think his response quite eloquently sums up why this argument fails.

I also really liked the statement from another blog, referenced in the comments, where the blogger said, “One cannot disprove the existence of an entity that makes no observable impact on the universe, but then why call such an impotent entity a deity?”