Christians have a much more sophisticated view of the universe than the author must realize. Also, there are some flawed thoughts held by the author concerning history as it is recorded. The idea that during the Middle Ages Christians destroyed scientific progress is not supported by historical research. Since you mention the scientific method, Roger Bacon, a Franciscan friar and the father of the modern scientific method existed during this time period. Comparing what is going on now with the followers of Mohammed to the Crusades unfortunate shows the author should spend some time studying both. As for the creation of a global community based on logic, reason, science, and compassion you have just described the the life of powerful follower of Jesus.
If you are nit picking between Islam and Christianity, I am afraid you missed the point.
Bacon was silly on my part.
Another point I found in the opening paragraph places the blame of many conflicts in the world on Christian beliefs. If you see someone killing another in the name of Christ then they taking teaching from a confused source.
From my perspective the quality of life for us is ever increasing. The cause behind these improvements can be found within the influence religious doctrines have held on the minds of each successive generation. If our human nature is naturally so good how do we explain all the suffering we subject each other to everyday?
I said several times in the article that I agree with all the moral teachings of all religions - which, by the way, are almost identical in all religions.
My main point is that we no longer need the "stories" in each religion because the vast majority of the population is literate now. The stories are what cause religions to attack each other. "My God is better than yours", "My prophet is right, yours is wrong". Those stories are no longer relevant or necessary. Instead, they cause strife and bloodshed.
Nowhere in the article do I single out Christianity as the only problem. All religions have this problem equally - because they are based on two thousand year old stories.
To counter your claim, Wikipedia (just to name one source) claims that 1.7 million people were killed in the crusades, 5.9 million killed in the Thirty Year's war, 1.5 million in the Armenian genocide. That's just three wars.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_wars_and_anthropogenic...
Hitler, Stalin, Mao, and Pol Pot were evil and noone is defending them. But it is a non sequitur to argue that their actions were motivated by atheism. I doubt a little atheist angel or daemon was sitting on their shoulder telling them what to do. In the case of religiously motivated warfare, however, the perpetrators were indeed taking orders from their imaginary friends.
Also, why are we limiting ourselves to "deaths"? Does that mean torture, imprisonment, sexual abuse, and other atrocities in the name of religion are acceptable?