Nah, that's juvenile and dumb. Do you think science alone justifies your value judgment of this article? Do you think positivism didn't implode many decades ago?

Some forms of religiosity/spirituality/existential depth do more justice to natural reality than others. I'm saying pantheism is more consistent with science than monotheism. If you think all such existential perspectives or evaluations are baseless, good luck using science alone to justify that condemnation of religiosity. You'll need philosophy, which puts you in the domain in which this article was written.

So why not stop shooting yourself in the foot?