I like his concluding remarks:
On the other hand, we have the natural answer. We see that there are natural laws and can predict many natural disasters. We know they are simply part of the world that we live in — parts that have helped form us, and without which we would not exist.
We can study disease and see it is not demonic or a superstitious curse. And as we have progressed in science, we have been able to cure many diseases.
We know that children are starving because of economic, agricultural, political, and cultural problems — problems that can be solved with science, government, and human compassion — not sacrificing sheep to an angry sky God who delights in the burning smell of animal blood.
The natural explanation makes far more sense than a supernatural one, and has the advantage of having an abundance of evidence. Why cling to old superstitions and supernatural boogeymen when we have a better natural explanation?