Great article. glad to see it in the mainstream press.
I wonder if a scientists prefers to admit to be incorrect because his ideas appear to support religion over the discovery that his findings were founded in error.
The article leans on the tendency to suggest that if a new discovery with solid factual evidence one day supports religion, such discovery “must be hidden”?
I guess that as long a discovery is scientifically sound and enjoys of factual evidence, the knowledge of it must be published regardless of its use as a support to religion or to anti-religious statements.
Of course, in this case this scientist seems to recognize also some mistakes inside his theory which invalidate his conclusions, still the look for a review by him appeared to be motivated because he discovered that the religious side was favoured with his theory.
Fortunately, the end of this story reveals that he was in error and his theory won’t be used as point of reference. This is what it counts at last and I’m glad as well of being in knowledge of the public.