Thales was and - is explosive for the sake of knowledge1He started methodological naturalism and ontological naturalism by excluding any gods from activity in worldly affairs. Those who aver that he stated that the world is full of gods mistake his position: he would have meant by that that natural forces are themselves their own bosses or that magnets have souls when he meant that natural forces act on their own. He was both the first philosopher and the first scientist.
Nowadays after science finds no need to use God in methodological naturalism in that He explains nothing, purveyors of intelligent design are trying to bring Him into science as the boss of natural forces and - creation evolutionists and such evolutionary creationists as Kenneth Miller, Karl Giberson, Francisco Jose Ayala and Francis Collins are proclaiming that science and religion go hand in hand, but that obfuscates and - blasphemes science in that it finds no intent behind natural causes and explanations as Lamberth's atelic or teleonomic argument adumbrates that the weight of evidence evinces teleonomy- no planned outcomes- rather than teleology-planned outcomes so that to argue for God's intent is to contradict those very natural causes. Natural selection, the non-planning,anti-chance agency of Nature acts like a sieve in determining what lifeforms succeed: to add God therefore would contradict it, making it irrelevant in effect.
Consequently, creation evolution and evolutionary creationism both are oxymoron, and conflict with rather than make Him compatible with science. Certainly, there are indeed scientists like the mentioned ones who think that they are compatible but that is cognitive dissonance- compartmentalisation - at work. Therefore the accommodationists err philosophically and -scientifically when they prattle that religion and science are compatible! Only from the side of religion could they be seen compatible as it is compatible with the paranormal,its twin superstition that make up what Dr.Paul Kurtz calls " The Transcendental Temptation," a must read book.
Obfuscating science is wrong. Miller cannot deliver the goods that God is involved in natural phenomena when he finds Him acting at sub-atomic events: that is a wild guess like what theologians guess anyway at His attributes and referents1 That is the god of the gaps! Read Amiel Rossow's article on the yin and yang of Miller and what Jerry Coyne, my friend, notes in " Seeing and Believing" about Miller and Giberson's approach with their obscurantism, both@ Talk Reason.
The Occasionalists themselves make the reductio ad absurdum- and no straw man- that Nicholas Malebranche finds in stating that He does the actual execution of the act when we strike the eight ball! That brings into stark relief the absurdity to claim that He is that Primary Cause when the phenomena themselves are the primary causes.
We ontological naturalists find that people should not only in science but in other matters exclude any God.
And then arises the presumption of naturalism and the igostic-Ockham challenge to supernaturalism.