That's how you see it, but I made a statement of fact. To me that's not 'beating science with a stick'. I am not a "certain section of 'the church'".
Perhaps you are overly sensitive with this subject and have misinterpreted my comment.
The inverted commas meant you weren’t meant to take the church bit too literally. You are repeating arguments made by certain sections of the church, hence the connection.
I can also infer from your statement of fact that you agree with their line of reasoning. And that is why I am arguing against it to you. Capiche?