One of the (obvious) reasons for the science/religion debate over evolution is the twin delusive perspectives of both sides: religionists and scientists can’t resolve the complexity of, say, the emergence of monotheism (via ‘Israel’/Persia) in the Axial Age, each side fumbling the ball. Religionists have injected a complicated design argument using a (to be fair, transitional) concept of theistic intervention in history, while scientists to the contrary exposing the factual quagmire of the whole tale are in turn unable to grasp the strange complexity of the Axial Age context. It is a strange situation where noone can resolve a set of paradoxical findings.
But more specifically the attempt to use darwinian theory to explain religion and its evolution has provoked a serious failure: science can’t even handle the fact/value distinction and must produce a mechanized model of events using the lame explanation of natural selection. So in a real sense science fails at the first step. The data of the Axial Age provides a clear ‘expose’ of this scientism mythology with an elusive glimpse of the way things like ‘religion’ develop over time.