Вера против фактов. Почему наука и религия несовместимы

The book clearly advocates for science over faith, but I wondered what influenced Coyne to focus on this approach versus a more nuanced discussion.

The way Coyne presents the evidence made me rethink some assumptions I had about how evolution is perceived in society. Would love to hear others' reactions.

I appreciated the clarity, but at times it felt a bit aggressive. Do others think that affects how the message is received or just underscores the urgency?