I see Provine's statements as ideas the author was examining while searching for a personal answer:

ARE WE ON THE PLANET EARTH BY ACCIDENT?
or
ARE WE HERE BECAUSE SOMEONE/SOMETHING PUT US HERE, EVEN IF THROUGH AN EVOLUTIONARY PROCESS?
and most importantly,
WAS THERE A BEGINNING?
and if so,
HOW DID THIS BEGINNING COME ABOUT?

I am not a scientist. I am just a normal guy that lives in the suburbs that has a family and a cool neighbor who has challenged my thinking.

In any case, most present-day scientists are either (1) nonreligious or else (2) regard their religion has having little or no relevance to their scientific endeavors.

I was with you right up until the end:

However, the major contribution to science that Biblical, especially Christianity has provided is the belief that God has created an orderly world that can be observed and understood by man's endeavors as opposed to a material/chance world governed by a capricious nature. That belief has convinced many that scientific observation and discovery is a worthwhile effort as it is a way to better understand God.

No, an "orderly world", like ours, implies naturalism. As far as we can tell, the same physical laws apply everywhere, and have done for all time. A "capricious" world would imply some kind of intelligence pulling the strings -- some kind of being with a "will" and a "mind", that could change its mind, and had the power to intervene to overrule the natural order. And this we do not see, except in myth, legend, and fiction.

The observation that the world is governed by natural laws is certainly not a contribution by religion, but by science.

Regarding religion's contributions to science, most of the early scientists, and many today were and are religious and consider that their religions drive them to better understand the source of their beliefs through scientific research. A religious person should never be opposed to science as that faith should be based on what they consider truth and further discovery should should only validate that truth. However, the major contribution to science that Biblical, especially Christianity has provided is the belief that God has created an orderly world that can be observed and understood by man's endeavors as opposed to a material/chance world governed by a capricious nature. That belief has convinced many that scientific observation and discovery is a worthwhile effort as it is a way to better understand God.

Dr. Provine states precisely what Stroble ascribes to his beliefs at 2:30.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W9W1Y_PmhSI&feature=related

I saw this and was disappointed. The atheist never addresses the argument being made.

Any thoughts?

Look, atheism as a world view is serious garbage!

Ah, then you have evidence of your god, or are you simply making an is/ought fallacy and/or argument from consequences?

Evolution and naturalism does not account ofr immaterial reality of our current world...

What "immaterial reality." If you can show that it exists, then I'll be impressed. And, it's no wonder that science and naturalism don't account for non-natural things. It's pretty much tautological.

...and I haven't seen anybody make a good argument that our morals are only culturally commensurate...that's ridiculous for a number of reasons.

Slavery is immoral now. That was easy.

Christianity may not be what you want it to be, but I tell you it's MUCH better than anything I've seen including atheism with all of it's wishful and hopeful premises and thinking...

Ah, so hopeful premises and thinking related to some sky daddy is better than living in reality? Sure it is.

You said: "The obvious thing to do would be to e-mail Dr. Provine to find out if this quote really represents what he believes."

Ahhh, YEA, that's exactly what Provine believes and it's traggic. I heard him in his debate against Philip Johnson at Stanford Universtity lay it out just like Strobel said.

Look, atheism as a world view is serious garbage! The people such as your self are probably smart and many good people but the world view is horrible. Evolution and naturalism does not account ofr immaterial reality of our current world, and I haven't seen anybody make a good argument that our morals are only culturally commensurate...that's ridiculous for a number of reasons.

Christianity may not be what you want it to be, but I tell you it's MUCH better than anything I've seen including atheism with all of it's wishful and hopeful premises and thinking...now that the TRUTH RUTH!

* there's no evidence for God
* there's no life after death
* there's no absolute foundation for right and wrong
* there's no ultimate meaning for life
* people don't really have free will [p.16]

Even if the above were true, it would be far, far, far better than billions of humans (one is too many!) writhing in flames for eternity. If Christians had any sense of empathy or compassion they would wish their religion to be false.