That's good, Alan. But this isn't a game of What Is It? It's just a regular neat stuff post.

It would not surprise me that someone who has undergone a traumatic brain injury or is married to someone who has undergone a traumatic brain injury is not in the mood to discuss the role of science in society.

I'm not religious, but I reject the notion that religious people are inherently stupid. They have managed to build human civilization, including medicine. This woman and her husband (the actual author of the miracle-named blog) are adherents of one of those religions that erected the modern world. Why is this bothersome? The world will move on and, hopefully, upward. These people are not enemies of human progress, any more than their predecessors, religious people who explored the natural world, were.

[Side note: is China, an officially atheist nation, really the counter example that you would like to offer?]

Can you propose an alternate response this young woman could make that would not involve rejecting her faith?

She has religious beliefs. There's nothing shameful about that.

Shannon, your statement reminds me of this Michael Crichton quote:

Briefly stated, the Gell-Mann Amnesia effect is as follows. You open the newspaper to an article on some subject you know well. In Murray's case, physics. In mine, show business. You read the article and see the journalist has absolutely no understanding of either the facts or the issues. Often, the article is so wrong it actually presents the story backward—reversing cause and effect. I call these the "wet streets cause rain" stories. Paper's full of them.

In any case, you read with exasperation or amusement the multiple errors in a story, and then turn the page to national or international affairs, and read as if the rest of the newspaper was somehow more accurate about Palestine than the baloney you just read. You turn the page, and forget what you know.

That was my thought, too! The contest must have been fixed.