Collins would clearly have a point if science a prior exclude references to a transcendent designer, but that's not the case. Look how many times we've gone round and round in this forum begging for some bit of evidence explainable only by invoking a designer. Scientist would have a field day trying to find an explanation.
Furthermore, if science were excluding the wind as an explanation there would be a vast number of phenomena readily recognizable and agreed upon for one and all to scratch their heads over.
"The curtains are moving again, Holmes"
"Yes, Watson, they are.
Currently there are not. I'm not saying there aren't plenty of things we don't understand, but how many of those things are common phenomena that can be defined by laymen in a way we'd tend to agree upon.
"God was with the Bo Sox in 2004, Holmes."
"You're a straight up loon, Watson. The St. Louis Cardinals spent the night before smoking marijuana cigarettes with a stand-up comedian*."
Scratching ones head under such circumstances is surely the best course. Attributing cause, especially non-examinable cause, would be a waste of time.
*All case studies are hypothetical and hold no reference to any person or persons alive or dead. Any similarity with any person or persons alive or dead is incidental.
Genesis 2
17 But of the ponderosa pine, thou shalt not eat of it; for in the day that thou shinniest thereof thou shalt sorely learn of thy nakedness.
18 And we all live happily ever after.
™ Version 4.2