Mr. Derbyshire,
I enjoy reading you, and particularly on this subject. A couple thoughts:
You write (in your Berlinski review linked above): “I am aware that galaxies collide and pass through each other, but are there really instances of them merging?”
You may know this by now (the review was from 2005), but galaxies do merge. To supply a ‘for instance’, check out the super-galaxy Messier 87. You can see a great representation of the galactic filamentary structure here (first five minutes, I believe), with M87 anchoring our nearest galaxy cluster:
http://www2.slac.stanford.edu/lectures/info_2007/2007_08_28.htm
Our current models suggest mergers account for the 10% or so of galaxies that are elliptical.
That’s one. Two, it’s possible that, upon reading your writings on science and religion, one takes away the idea that you come down on the side of science because its methodology is superior in principle and in fact, but for me, personally, I don’t think you stress this point hard enough. As Nietzsche wrote, “The most valuable insights are arrived at last; but the most valuable insights are methods.” Truth claims arrived at from pure reason, intuition (redundant, I know), and revelation are epiphenomena of a species-specific pathos; they are radically contingent, pure cacophony produced by methodological noise.
So when someone tells you that, at bottom, one must also have faith in science, so neener-neener, you can say, yes, this is true, but my faith is elevated to procedure, whereas your faith is mired in result. He’ll either get it or he won’t, but by definition, you will have won.
