science and religion

this article by martin rees on the new statesman website (found via john brockman ) is interesting  

in it martin rees explains how he focuses on the big questions (via cosmology) unlike many scientists who focus on "bite-sized" problems that are timely and tractable (but they then run the risk of losing sight of the big picture) 

he goes on to say that we should all oppose - as darwin did - views manifestly in conflict with the evidence, such as creationism, but that he thinks the debate between science and religion should be constructive rather than antagonistic.  

he takes this view partly because we should all be dubious of any claim to have achieved more than a very incomplete and metaphorical insight into any profound aspect of our existence.