You pointedly ignored the next sentence, where he said " our faith is based on an abundance of credible, compelling evidence." The evidence won't be experimental, because a rational entity is under no obligation to perform on demand any more than Obama is obligated to prove the validity of his birth certificate to every Birther nut. The evidence is mostly deductive and based on inference. You may choose to reject the inferences. That doesn't mean they don't exist or are invalid. You may also say there are alternative interpretations of the evidence. And so there are. That doesn't automatically make them the correct interpretations.