The key is to focus on the lack of scientific evidence for evolution, as we have no fossil evidence for transition from one species to another, and forget arguing about the time table.
I think the key is balance between the two. We need science and, we need faith.
Science created Lance Armstrongs drugs, apparently there were no men of faith there to advise him not to use them, hence his downfall from grace.
Science creates lots of things and we need people of faith to decided which we actually need.
The paragraph that jumped out at me most was the author’s recognition that the conclusions that both reached were based on foundational assumptions that both agreed they were not willing to compromise on.
The problem with that is you assume that it's a zero-sum game, and if you could somehow prove evolution wrong then that automatically means Biblical creation is right. That ignores the fact that there are as many stories of creation as there are religions and cultures.