Science is the key/ Not Religion

The Big Bang is thought of, by most atheists, as a combustion of the Universe. But it is also considered to be what started all forms of matter and life--even though that really makes no logical sense even when just saying it here! So I am not wrong when talking about the Big Bang in that way. I was showing how science can easily be refuted over the years, in fact some "facts" have been known to refute themselves over time, therefore science is not very sturdy when thinking long term. The two examples I gave to back up my statements included siting the Miller-Urey Experiment, which was put in science textbooks and said to prove how the Big Bang could've happened. But 20 years later they figured out that, all along, it was wrong and did not prove anything--while the public understood otherwise (didn't know). You must not know anything about the experiment, unless of course the word never got to you that the experimenters were wrong. It just goes to show, then! Your second paragraph was a bit confusing. In the 1st Round I did not barely mention fossils; show me where I did and what your point is in all your words! The way I understand it, you say that it is difficult to argue against/for evolution with fossils, but then you give three links to fossil records and say "I encourage further research." Is this not a debate about science versus religion, and vice versa? Or are you trying to prove that science IS sturdy and reliable long term, no matter what? Still I do not see what you are getting at, or why. Seeing that I must do rebuttals in order to win any points--(nervous smirk)--I will also provide three websites regarding fossils: 1) http://creation.com... 2) http://www.gotquestions.org... 3) http://www.icr.org... My opponent: "I will summarize what you said...Science always changes and is not reliable to learn because things we learn now are replaced with new facts several years later...Christianity should be the teachings to study because it offers historical insight into our past." No. Not at all. I am simply arguing that science is not the only "key" because religion (Christianity) is also, and God is more important than both of these because He is our Creator and He loves us. But yes, I have proven in some ways how science changes sometimes therefore cannot be TRUSTED ALWAYS: you over exaggerated. "To debate this, I would like to say that I would prefer not to learn how Noah saved all of the animals on the Earth, and how Moses parted the Red Sea and about the magical snake in the garden in my history classes. I would much rather (and every other intelligent person would agree) venture into the proven stories of Napoleon, the Founding Fathers, and ancient civilizations." It is quite obvious that the stories told in the Bible are much more ancient (written 3-2,000 years ago) than the date Napoleon lived (200 years ago), so the Bible explains a lot more that we otherwise wouldn't learn of easily. You call miracles magical myths while there is SCIENTIFIC evidence for the events in the Bible. For example: scientists have calculated that a wind blowing at the speed of 67 miles per hour sustained overnight could have exposed a reef that existed close below the ocean surface. The Israelites could have then fled over the passage before the wind died down and waters rose again, blocking the way for pursuing Egyptian soldiers in their wheeled chariots. Some 3,500 years ago, the reef would have been closer to the water's surface so it would have been exposed for just the right amount of time. It would take the Jews four hours to cross the 7-kilometer reef that runs from one coast to another, and half an hour before the waters went back. [1] It has actually been proven possible, just as you say the Big Bang was (through a faulty experiment), except that irrefutable scientific evidence was found (UNLIKE the Miller-Urey Experiment). Chariot wheels at the bottom of the "Red Sea." [2] http://www.wnd.com... http://www.new-horizon.co.uk... http://www.bibleprobe.com... http://2.bp.blogspot.com... "Also, whatever history the Bible does tell of, is severely limited. What of the historical events that happened before and after the writing and conscription of the Christian Holy Book?" That is irrelevant. We are comparing scientific (most commonly known as the mainstream study) to historic artifact (the religious,Christian Bible) to see which is the "key," and if the words in Christianity's Book don't change like science does and they can agree with the facts seen observed in the world, why can't they both be equally important to a person's life (why can't they both be used as the "key")? "What of other religions? What of Greek, Norse, Arab, Asian, Native American, South American, African, and many more, beliefs? There are thousands of religions in the history of the world, each with their different story to tell. Why is Christianity the "most right"?' This is a good (and popular) question, and I have an answer other than "because it is the most populated religion." For one thing, there is mounds of evidence for it. [3] The world around us reveals that God DOES exist. There is historical evidence for Jesus Christ. [4] There is physical evidence that Jesus Christ actually rose from the dead. [5] All of these things about Jesus were prophetically foretold by God in the Bible with specificity: [6]. There is proof Jesus Christ is doing miracles today. [7] But most importantly of all, out of all these evidences, Christianity is unique because of the salvation. Humans cannot be perfect and will always sin, that is the reality, so besides worshipping God we do not have any burden of earning our way to Heaven (to be with Jesus) because He has already paid our debt, and the funny thing is no other religion is like this! "What of the genetic evidence?...If God was so powerful and mighty to create an entire Universe, why would there be genes? Are genes a way for God to show math for his ultimate design?" Why wouldn't God give us genes?! It just goes to show how He created each and every one of us uniquely, and loves us each as exactly how He designed. [8] "Why would God care about humans? If the universe is 13.8 billion years old, and humans emerged about three million years ago, why do you and other Christians seem to say that God cares so much about us? If the Universe was created to be prosperous for human life, why did it take so long for us to come to be?" My opponent I assuming that all scientific facts in the whole world point to Evolution and OET (Old Earth Theory). This is not true in the slightest, as there is lots of evidence to back up YEC. [9] But if God created us specially a I believe He did, He wouldn't just forget about us and move onto his duties in Heaven I don't think...we are His prized possession and God cares for us, as we should for Him! I hope these rebuttals answer your questions and fill in the holes of inquisitiveness. Thank you. SOURCES [1] http://abcnews.go.com... [2] http://www.wnd.com... [3] http://evidenceforchristianity.blogspot.com... [4] http://www.grantjeffrey.com.... [5] http://shatteredparadigm.blogspot.com... [6] http://www.xenos.org... [7] http://www.amightywind.com... [8] http://www.ucg.org... [9] http://answersingenesis.org...