The article makes the claim that there is a correlation between people's intuition and their religious beliefs. It states that people who are more inclined to go with their intuitions are more likely to go to church every Sunday and vise versa, thus making religion boil down to a gut feeling. In this instance the researchers used the correlation between people that answer questions with their gut feelings to connect it with their answers of how religious they are, there though lies a problem in that. In no way can the researchers really tell if a person is answering the question intuitively or not because there is no know way to measure instinctive behavior on survey without there being limiting. In other words the simple counter argument of this being correlation without causation could work. Also this is can be considered an extraordinary claim since there hasn't been a claim like this made in about this subject that is quit this controversial. So extraordinary evidence is needed in order to prove that such a claim like this is accurate, in my assessment of the evidence presented in this article by the researchers, there is not enough concrete evidence to prove that this correlation is nothing but that a correlation. Which leads me to my third point which is Occam's razor, the simplest answer is usually the correct one, and in this case the simplest answer would be that religious affiliation is something that is gain through one's environment and not one's intuition.