After all the assertions, question begging and usual obfuscation:-

@Wood ...... ...the reliability of our cognitive faculties, our access to logical laws, the Uniformity of Nature, or the values we hold. But since science presupposes and depends upon these features of our world,

(Anthropomorphic backside first theist thinking as usual)

The underlying science is in no way dependent on human perceptions of nature. Science is a human description of how nature works to testable levels of accuracy.
Science does not have all the answers and humans are fallible! (therefore [unspecified] theists without evidence, are infallible!!!) - Classic theist alleged logic! - Epic fail!

@Wood - Naturalism provides no foundation for science, and scientific discovery is an enormous problem for Naturalism.

Ha! ha! ha! - Go to the bottom of the class and re-commence the induction course in infant science!

@Quine - Put all of this together, and Mr. Woods has no justifications for his conclusions.

Quite! !! - Blah! blah! blah! - found a few gaps, concocted a heap of waffle, and knotted up some contorted, tangled, semantic, brain knitting - therefore god-did-it!