Here is me trying to explain the inherent distinctness of science and faith:
Through history, science has parted ways with its supernatural counterpart – astronomy and astrology; chemistry and alchemy; allopathy and homeopathy; etc. Methodological naturalism, controlled experimentation, use of statistics, falsification, etc, took hold as a central tenants of scientific pursuits at some point. Physics and philosophy were co-mingled for a while, but at some point we went our separate ways too (for the most part). Scientific models are simply useful. They fit data. If they continue to be predictive, we keep them. If not, we revise or scrap them. That’s not how our counter-parts conduct themselves. It can be frustrating when science sounding things are co-opted and used to provide undo legitimacy to notions that have been falsified by observation and that the relevant scientific community does not support in any way (and sometimes even solidly rejects).
So, occasionally when people suggest we re-mingle we’re really not keen on that. Science does not concern itself with what ought to be, but what is observed. It is amoral. It is unforgiving. It doesn’t care about you. It is uncompromising. It is the growing and morphing beast that is willing and able to tell you, that all those notions that you hold dear, that give you comfort, that make sense in your head, that have been passed down through generations, are false – and there is nothing you can do about it. It reduces everything to the observable, repeatable, and independently verifiable because it concerns itself with nothing else.