Science proves God's existance

My opponent has, again, failed to provide any scientific evidence that proves God exists. I shall respond to some of my opponents claims, again, and I would like to remind my opponent that he only has 1 round left in which to provide his evidence.“and suddenly I realized something: If the theory of evolution was real, why are there still chimps and gorilla's on the planet with us, where could it have begun? 15 hours of thinking, calculating, contemplating, and you couldn't even solve a simple conundrum like this.The reason why Chimps and Gorillas are still on the planet with us, is because we didn't evolve from them, we share a common ancestor with them. Just like how Americans descended from Europeans, and yet there are still Europeans alive today.Infact, Answers in Genesis, a Pro-creationist website, has listed this as one of the arguments they believe creationists should not use(1).In other words, the Creationists are saying "Please don't use this argument, because it makes the rest of us look dumb". 20 seconds on Google is, apparently, superior to your 15 hours of contemplation.But, again, I fail to see what this has to do with science proving the existence of God."The answer came to me clearly: if we understood infinity our minds' full capacity would be unveiled, and then they'd melt in the process. Our physical forms are incapable of comprehending time; it is impossible to describe with our limited brain capacity."Mathematicians seem to be using and understanding Infinity just fine, and I am not aware of any Mathematician whose brain has melted. Yet again, this has nothing to do with whether science has proven the existence of God. “The moment the thought completed it's cycle, I felt a fire inside my skull, and then I blacked out. I awoke knowing that I knew nothing.” I could not agree more. You clearly know nothing about Evolution, about the Big bang theory, about science, or scientific evidence, which is why you have yet to provide any scientific evidence that God exists. You have so many fundamental misunderstandings about science. "But popular vote cannot change the fact that the whole population of Earth might agree on something being correct, and it could still be wrong."Certainly. No one is suggesting that just because something is popular, it is right. Which is why we do not rely on popular opinion in science. Instead, we rely on evidence.And, again, you have yet to provide any evidence that a God exists."My opponent may think that, because I am a christian, I do not question my teachings recieved in church. But I doquestion them, every second of every day. I open myself to new ideas, and that is what makes me strong." I have never thought this about my opponent. However, opening yourself to new ideas, is different from accepting those ideas as true or accurate. This is especially true in science.Science requires evidence in order for a new idea to be accepted. You can open your mind to new ideas all you want, but until you provide actual evidence, it is not accepted as Science."Some have limited yourself to the theory of evolution without sufficient evidence to say it is truth, and that makes them weak." And if the topic of your debate was "There is insufficient evidence to accept evolution as science", then maybe you would have a point.However, again, the topic is "Science proves God's Existence". Even if evolution was false, and had no evidence, this would not be scientific evidence that a God exists. "Some say space/time did not exist during the Big Bang, but how could something of such magnitude happen without the essence of the universe previously existing as well?"This is a logical fallacy called argument from Ignorance(2). "Instead of simply denying everything, think about all this with an open mind."My mind is open. So where is the scientific Evidence that God exists? You only have one more round left. Source:1. http://creation.com...2. http://www.logicallyfallacious.com...