OK here is a new attempt at the Troll Hammer:

How can we extricate ourselves from this incessant bickering?

I would suggest less hubris (that is to say, a strong dose of humility) and more intellectual bravery on both sides of the divide.

For the scientist, hubris often takes the form of a belief that one’s intellectual abilities are always superior to those who disagree about matters of faith. The strong dose of humility would mean remembering basic scientific principles. If someone makes a claim that does not challenge the scientific method or any scientifically proven fact, it is not a threat to science. More importantly, a claim about something that can not be measured or observed is outside of the realm of science to judge. An incorporeal Creator is not, by definition, subject to experiment and therefore will always be outside of the domain of science. Hence, anything that the scientist says about the possible (non)existence of a Creator is no more or less a statement of belief than any other. When a scientist claims to have scientific reasons to discount belief in a Creator, he is only stating his own personal beliefs and not anything that has the authority and weight of science itself. To illustrate this further, some scientists might claim that there is no evidence for the existence of God, and therefore God does not exist. However, science has no tools available to disprove the existence of God. And, basic logic shows that just because one can not prove that something is there, does not mean that it is not. For some time, we could not prove the existence of electrons either.

In a similar vein, the hubris of the believer takes the form of a belief that one’s personal understanding of God’s Will sanctions him to discount the insights of all others should they disagree - in all contexts. The strong dose of humility for the believer would mean growing out of the belief that his understanding of God’s word is somehow greater than the proven revelation of God’s will in the physical universe. After all, if one believes that God created the universe, then the universe is by definition the will of God. Tradition holds that the Bible is a blueprint of all of creation. In light of this, the believer should realize that good science is an act of good faith, because it reveals the Will of God.

The alternative, that is to say, an entrenched arrogance, is no good for either, and it contradicts both of their belief systems. The scientist prides himself on his strict adherence to the scientific method. He is uncompromising in his exclusive reliance upon observation, hypothesis, and testing. Therefore, to put forward a speculative conviction about a theological matter in the name of science is more than out of character, it is a gross violation of the scientific method. Similarly, the believer, that denigrates the value of scientific inquiry is negating one of the primary tools that the Creator gave him to experience the Transcendental.