There is no logical or proveable conclusion to the origins of the universe through religion.

I am glad my opponent has responded, and I am eager to complete this debate. All I ask is that con does not forfeit this debate, as I would like to achieve voter status. Now to my rebuttals: My opponent concedes to my argument that religion is created by mankind. With this in mind, we can assume that the explanations religion offers for the origin of the universe are not only based on zero facts, but made up by us. If religion is a creation of mankind, and holds no proof, than it is discreditable. How can we believe something that is made up and holds no facts? It would be mindless to do so. Science holds proof, because it does prove the laws of physics and has theories regarding space-time backed by logic and mechanics [1][2][3]. It makes sense that our universe is governed by the laws of matter and physics, which makes everything in the universe happen in a certain way. All of these theories can prove aspects of our universe, such as the properties of space time, quantum mechanics, and classical physics [4]. My opponents claim that atheism doesn't prove the laws of time and space makes no sense. I have referenced science as the best explanation to the origins of the universe, rather than religion. I never referenced atheism as being able to prove the laws of our universe ,and/or its origins. Atheism is simply the belief usually associated with science. Not all scientists are atheists, but the field of science we are discussing [5], it is dominated by atheism. The explanations provided by religion are extremely unlikely to be true, while the explanations offered by science are based on facts and logic. The laws of science are far more accurate than silly stories told by churches and religions worldwide. Science is the best answer because it only came to our society when technology was advanced enough to let us truly observe how the world functions. Religion had been around since the beginning of mankind, and still has no credible or reasonable evidence.I know that it can be hard to abandon ones faith in a particular religion, and I am not asking this of con. They can believe what they want to, but what I am trying to state is that religion offers no true or credible explanation for the origins of the universe. I ask of the voters to vote Pro, because I have provided sources and claims that counter all of con's claims and arguments, without con being able to truly refute my arguments. However, I have enjoyed this debate, and I wish good luck on my opponent with their final argument.Sources: https://en.wikipedia.org... [1]https://en.wikipedia.org... [2]https://en.wikipedia.org... [3]https://www.spec2000.net... [4]https://en.wikipedia.org... [5] All Sources: https://en.wikipedia.org... https://en.wikipedia.org... https://en.wikipedia.org... http://physics.stackexchange.com... https://en.wikipedia.org... http://www.universetoday.com... https://en.wikipedia.org... https://en.wikipedia.org... https://en.wikipedia.org... https://pisoproject.wordpress.com... https://en.wikipedia.org... https://en.wikipedia.org... https://en.wikipedia.org... https://www.spec2000.net... https://en.wikipedia.org... - MakeDebatingGreatAgain