I've often heard that even though there are fundamentalists who are at odds with scientific knowledge in their beliefs that there's no real conflict between science and religion. It's just that those fundamentalists are engaging in bad theology, interpreting their holy book in a way that isn't warranted. Fundamentalists charge non-fundamentalists also with an interpretation error, interpreting the holy book in such a way as to diminish any authority it may have.
Which view is right might be a matter for theologians, historians, philosophers, and those claiming divine revelation, but for those outside the belief argue on the basis of political preference. That is to say the non-fundamentalist view is right because the fundamentalist view is detrimental to education, to morality, to science, to history, to a sense of culture and pluralism. They're right because it's better for us pro-secular types that they're right, yet this argument is hardly convincing.