answer:We’ve been over this a bunch here. In fact, in a thread very similar to this one, many people here flaunt their misunderstanding of science in a way that only seems possible in a climate of extreme anti-intellectualism and a tolerance of stupidity. As smart as Stephen Jay Gould was, his non-overlapping magisteria view was asinine. Edit: My “we’ve been over this a bunch here” isn’t meant to say this isn’t a good question. It is a great question. I think we should be talking about this more. I just suspect this thread will mirror the other threads which are full of “but science is always changing”, or “science is corrupt”.