I think you have misinterpreted the essay’s conclusion, perhaps due to the definition of “metascience”. I actually agree with your logic here and I never intended to make that argument. My conclusion is not that religion and science work – it’s that religion and science MAY work. My goal was to present one specific interpretation of how the idea of “god” (however that may be interpreted) is reasonable in the scientific world. This interpretation is a metascientific claim which, as described by Shapin [4], may disagree wildly with other metascientific claims!