First Order of business:
An almighty backhand to the face of Roger Scruton for his condescending tone - arrogant dickpole.

Now onto his article,
A woefull ignorance of science but knowing a few sciency sounding words is not enough, neither is having read 'A Very Short Introduction to Kant', to form an article, let alone an argument.

His whole 'not my god or religion' piece at the beginning showed him for what he is - moronic - he surely can't believe that all religious people accept the findings of science (HAS HE NOT HEARD OF FUCKING CREATIONISM FOR QUETZ SAKE!)

And the continually implied 'atheism is a belief' current throughout his article shows either a deceitful nature or a lack of understanding of what he seems to affiliate with (his pseudo spiritual christian viewpoint doesn't hold much truck with atheists or other religites) and those who are out of the whole sky mum business.

All in all, a very misinformed and inaccurate piece.

Edit: Spelling