Science has shown or is about to show that we don't need God as an explanation

I accept. I thank you for offering this interesting debate, though I originally thought that I was going to debate as Con. I would like to state that I am not an atheist and I do believe in the Christian God. Nevertheless, I will attempt to show that we are on the verge of a scientific breakthrough that will make the idea of a creator god less plausible. First, I would like to compare what we know strictly from science versus what we know from religion. Thanks to some scientific breakthroughs in the field of quantum mechanics and string theory, we now know an incredible amount of knowledge of how the universe works, the various particles that make up our universe, and how we have been created. On the other hand, few of the ancient religions address these insights that we have today. Although most have a creation story, these are far from accurate. Young Earth Creationism has almost no solid scientific evidence, and the stars and galaxies took about a billion years to form after the Big Bang, rather than in 7 days. And in no where does a religious text talk about physics, elements, atoms, or anything pertaining to the scientific knowledge we have today. While I'm not suggesting that a religious text should have Maxwell's equations written in them, religious texts fail to address even the most basic concepts of our universe. Now we must look at how far science has gotten us today. While there are still many unanswered questions in physics, we are closer than ever to creating a GUT, a grand unified theory of the four fundamental forces of nature. Our Standard Model is almost complete, which contains all of the particles and fundamental forces, with exception to gravity and some exotic concepts such as dark matter. The Higgs Boson was finally confirmed to exist last year, which is monumental in physics because it gives other particle their mass. The important thing to look at is whether we are on a "verge" of finally understanding our universe. Given our rapid discoveries of revolutionizing ideas in the 20th century, I see no reason why we shouldn't be able to continue this and eventually complete the Standard Model and have a GUT. We must also look at our creation and how we have become what we are today. The Big Bang Theory is widely accepted today as the beginning of the universe, rather than some religious creation story. We have massive amounts of evidence to support this such as cosmic background radiation that still resonates from the Big Bang. Also, evolutionism is the mainstream theory to explain how humans were created. Similarities with DNA, fossil records, and structural similarities all point towards us having a common ancestor with apes. Natural selection also is an explanation for our "intelligent design". Rather than having a creator that crafted us to be complex creatures, science suggests that we have these traits because they help us survive and reproduce, allowing them to be passed on from generation to generation. A note to voters: I have not included any links primarily due to the philosophic nature of my arguments. Indeed, it is difficult to find a website that would support my arguments. The only thing I could possibly cite is some information regarding concepts such as the Big Bang, topics that I have touched upon only briefly. This knowledge comes from my general knowledge and education from school, but should a casual reader be unfamiliar with these concepts, it should not be difficult for them to look them up on a website such as wikipedia to get a brief overview. If however, my opponent insists on having citations in our debate, I will of course be willing to cite articles or websites next round that reaffirm my basic arguments. I look forward to seeing your arguments next round.