He still hasn’t revealed his divine-o-meter so people can start finding God’s interventions when doing science.
“Science without God” is what God has given us since He has not provided us the means to identify His handiwork out from the rest of the data. So while Richard insults many or most Christians by seemingly “equating them with atheists”, Christians who do science without including God are just operating with what God has given. That he cannot tell the difference between operating using what God has given and excluding God is sad.
It strikes me that there isn’t a way to argue science that would encourage people to believe in God – but then there isn’t a way to discuss the engineering of the SpaceX Starship that would encourage people to believe in God – or for that matter to ‘believe’ in Elon Musk! – because if their existence has no impact in how things are examined then the only thing that can be done is what my first college biology professor did: he included a line from a Psalm at the top of each week’s handout.
So Dale is actually doing the only thing that a Christian can do when he indicates that God’s providence is at work in evolution: he is ascribing the foundation to God, then proceeding the same as any other scientist – and that is regardless of field; archaeologists may come closer to “including” God because religion tends to be a force in ancient societies that influenced most of society, yet even the archaeologist doesn’t aim at including God, it just pops up in the evidence sometimes . . .
which is a commentary on biology, geology, oceanography, meteorology, and more since God just doesn’t pop up in the evidence in any of those fields – and trying to include Him when the evidence leaves no pointers would be bad science.