Actually, Occam's razor is a foundation of science, rather than something which should be used to back it up. Occam said that we ought to accept the simplest argument which could adequately explain its subject, NOT that that argument correctly shows what occurs in the world.
It is not true that everything that science stands for is open to argument. Science will always explain things in the simplest possible terms. This itself is not open.
Nowadays many people see evolution and creationism as being incompatible. Darwin was not one of them. His theory of evolution was, when he founded it, at an early stage, and therefore easier to fit in with religion. Many scientists now (see Dawkins!) have a different view. My point is that it is not the intelligence of these scientists, but their belief that evolution is incompatible with religion, that leads to their atheism. To be honest, it was a throwaway comment and I regret making it!
