I just wanted to say that what you quoted is common knowledge and the article's author did not need to repeat it again. Because of this, I did not understand (in turn) why a person like you would quote something really cliche.
["common knowledge"? "cliche"?] That's rich. Almost as profound as pooh-poohing dreams with talk of some pill... as if that somehow covers the mysteries of the human mind. Are you sure you read (and understood) what Davies said (and meant)?
Else... what then has been the big squawk here throughout the past 5 pages? Haven't the proponents of strict scientific methods been debasing faith as nothing but a security blanket for mindless morons? [And doesn't Davies assert that much of the basic laws of physics are themselves taken with a certain amount of faith? Because (although proven "accurate" so far) they aren't truly understood -- at least that's my interpretation.]
