I posted this comment at Huffingtonpost on a "what if there's evidence for god article". It's somewhat relevant, if not completely to this article's topic:

If understanding through knowledge takes precedence over faith, then there really is no place for god, because lack of understanding is never justification for practicing faith. Having something beyond your current understanding descend from the sky saying 'made by god' is only evidence for that lack of understanding. Beyond this, saying that scientific evidence can exist for a supernatural being beyond our understanding is contradictory. You cannot claim to understand something through evidence, then claim at the end that it can't be understood. So, again, there is no criteria met that can be considered proof. It's a bit like saying "Bob made this, so Bob is god", but you don't know anything about Bob or how he made something. All you've proven is that you've encountered something you don't understand, and attributed qualities to Bob without understanding Bob, or in the end why those qualities you believe to be true are true, i.e. omniscience, omnipotence, etc.